Talons Philosophy

An Open Online Highschool Philosophy Course


Knowledge Comes From Within – Adam


For my reading, i once again went to the Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy to figure out what parts of their post i agreed with. In it, i found they made the statement that

According to TK, knowledge that p is, at least approximately, justified true belief (JTB). False propositions cannot be known. Therefore, knowledge requires truth. A proposition S doesn’t even believe can’t be a proposition that S knows. Therefore, knowledge requires belief. Finally, S‘s being correct in believing that p might merely be a matter of luck.[2] Therefore, knowledge requires a third element, traditionally identified as justification. Thus we arrive at a tripartite analysis of knowledge as JTB: S knows that p if and only if p is true and S is justified in believing that p. According to this analysis, the three conditions — truth, belief, and justification — are individually necessary and jointly sufficient for knowledge.

(TK-traditional knowledge) – (S-Subject trying to obtain knowledge) – (P-proposition in which knowledge is to be obtained) – (JTB- justified true belief)

now, this is an interesting analysis as it seems to say that knowledge is justified true belief. However, it also says that a guessed truth that is later proven true is justified. Now, for me at least, this seems to contradict their conclusion that logic is a justified true belief. While I agree that knowledge must be believed by a person for it to be true, as what you don’t know is not a conclusion within itself, but a narrowing of the field in what conclusion you are looking for. Back to guessing truth however, someone’s true belief is reason enough for the knowledge to be known. As according to the article, guessed truths have the ability to be proven later, and you can disprove it now, but with the opportunity to be review and proven true, the true belief or any supposedly justified true belief can neither be proven nor disproven as it has the ability to be found as the opposite later on. Because of this, i believe knowledge is a person’s true belief subject to nothing but their own views through how they interpret the world. Due to the last sentence being the guiding principle of my view of knowledge, i must conclude that knowledge is also subjective as we will each interpret it our own way through our minds. This goes further for me in that with the revelation that all knowledge is interpreted by our minds, all knowledge must come from within as to be able to interpret our surroundings, we must have some innate understanding of what is going on. Therefore, i believe that as humans, we all know everything there is to know, it’s just a matter of finding the right experiences to unlock that innate understanding.


Epistemology “Phil’s Day Off” — David Sadeghizadeh


My goal for this unit’s “Phil’s Day Off” was to be able to think of something that would help me with my question. I wanted to do better than what I did last time, which wasn’t going to be that difficult as in my last one wasn’t that productive. Then there was a problem. I couldn’t think of anything to do… Until Monday night, I had no idea what I was going to do. Then an idea came into my head. Since my question was, “Does knowledge need to be justified for it to be true?” or “Justified True Belief vs True Belief,” and since I know that justified true belief is not knowledge, I thought that I could find true beliefs that aren’t necessarily justified and just research about that. The only issue was that it was late and the next day would be a school day so I decided that my “Phil’s Day Off” would need to continue on, which is where I am now. The only real difference from my last “Phil’s Day Off” would be that this time, I have a clearer path now and I think it will be a beneficial to me later on.


Phil’s Day Off 2: Epistemological Boogaloo


Image Courtesy of sunrisebasictraining.com


My goal for Philosophy’s Day Off was to test my belief that all negative knowledge and experiences are positive in some way. While not my original plan, I ended up making this test during my Sunday shift washing dishes at the Westwood Country Club restaurant.

I came in expecting an average shift. While there was a wedding on, there were two other washers with me and we were only scheduled until 11:30. I came in feeling optimistic and relaxed. However, at the last quarter of our shift, we found ourselves trapped behind carts of dirty dishes like prison cage bars. Such a quantity of dirty dishes is unsightly to a dishwasher, but the three of us kept at it at the bars eventually disappeared. Then one of the waiters came and ruined our recently uplifted moods; we would be resetting tonight. Resetting means that all the dishes must be washes before we left, so that they could all be returned to their proper place as if the restaurant were opening for the first time.

Yeah, that sucked.

We stayed an hour longer than we were originally scheduled, which never feels good. As I drove home, realizing that I would wake up “later today” instead of “tomorrow”, I considered all the consequences of my extended shift. Sure, I felt exhausted, cheated, and generally annoyed at the whole experience, but then I thought about the realm outside of my immediate reaction. More work means more money, and since I’ve recently become more devoted to the collection of comics, books, films, and such, more money is always helpful. I considered the people responsible for resetting, and how their job had been made easier because of my extra efforts. I know that, were I in their shoes, I’d want the dishwashers to have everything ready for a reset.

I went to sleep feeling not completely irritated, having proven my belief that my negative experience had a positive outcome.

In my Metaphysics study, I studied the idea of people who are incapable of redemption. I have a similar remaining question with my current study; is there any kind of negative experience or knowledge that has no positive undertones whatsoever? The bloody murder of one’s entire family comes to mind, but is there something perhaps a little more subtle?

Compared to my last Phil’s Day Off, where I observed parents’ behavior around their children in public, this one was very different. Most of the consideration was done after the activity, as opposed to during it. I also felt that I had more conclusive results than my last one, which mainly furthered my understanding of the concept.


Ignorance of a day off – Kyle


My goal on this day off differs from my topic a little and more works on that knowledge comes through experiences. Now while talking to people I quickly noticed I didn’t really see their point of view because mine was flooding my mind with questions, and I quickly wanted to see if I could learn something new without senses? So obviously I cant just press a button and turn them off but I did something like that. I wore a blind fold to try to remove my sight, I wore soundproof headphones to remove sound (even though the thing I was trying to learn did not use sound), I then put on thick gloves to attempt to remove my feel, now obviously I could still feel because I can feel the gloves I was wearing, but Its the best I could have done next to actually numbing my hands. Now I grabbed a pen, or what seemed like a pen? Because I couldn’t feel or see it, so really I might have just been sitting there doing nothing for all I know. But for what I was thinking about, I wanted to learn how to do pen tricks, something I’ve never been able to do but have always wanted to.

I achieved nothing; when it comes to pen tricks, however when It came to knowledge I achieved it. I learnt that knowledge is something you must learn with your senses. Now obviously if I had no senses, I wouldn’t know much, nor would that be really possible to lose them all like that. However to counter that, I slowly removed each restraint after about an hour, for a total of around four hours, to see what sense I could learn this trick without. It came down to sight. I could live without hearing much, I’m already partially deaf in my left ear so I know what not being able to hear limits me to, and pen tricks is not that. Same to as feel, sure gloves don’t remove my feel but they do limit it, but that’s not a sense I needed for pen tricks as much as sight did. Without being able to see I really limited myself because I don’t even know if I was doing anything, for all I know I was holding a phone and flipping it all day. So in the end I learnt a little about my senses.

However what more would senses effect in my day to day life and learning, and if I had my senses heightened somehow would I be able to learn things people can’t?

I tried to learn something foreign to me while last time I played something I play a lot, so it was something new my senses weren’t used to.


Epistemology Discussions — David Sadeghizadeh


The discussions we had in class for our epistemological questions and the rapid-fire questions were a nice time to wrap my head around my and other people’s questions. It helped me to understand my question more as I talked about it and got feedback. I really liked the rapid-fire questions because i think it helped some people with their questions and it was nice to think about some of the questions as well.

I don’t really remember much from the discussions as I wasn’t able to write down things fast enough but the few things I do remember are:

  1. When I was talking to Jess, we talked about the concept of the limits of knowledge and if there was such a thing. Jess said that there is no limit to knowledge itself but we have limits to how much knowledge we can take in, which I agreed to.
  2. Dom and I talked about multiple questions as we were always close to each other in the discussions but one thing that really stood out of all the questions was the information vs knowledge vs wisdom topic. Dom suggested that information is the objective thing that is out there and that has nothing to do with us and knowledge is the thing that we perceive the information using our sense and whatnot, and I agree with him. An example would be that we can see a box on a table (yes a REAL box, no gimmicks) and we all see it there so we all know there is a box there and it doesn’t even need us to perceive that it is there because it will be there with or without us. However, the colour of the box or the texture can be discussed and argued for ever as it is something that only we sense and discover. This video explains this phenomenon really well.


Active Learning – Jessica Lewis


For this Phils active learning assignment my goal was to evaluate how knowledge can be passed through something, whether it may be tangible or not.

I went through my family tree and mapped out people through my ancestors. I looked at their skills and abilities and connected them to my own and to my siblings.

I learnt that knowledge can be acquired as the generations continue. Also I learnt that knowledge really  is everywhere and in everyone. Looking through all of my family members and ancestors with my sister was a transfer of knowledge by itself but also leaning about my distant cousins from Australia and great great great aunt and uncle in Europe

A further question is have is through an example. Hypothetically, Take someone’s  great great great grandfather  for example. If He fought in World war one and worked hard at a young age, does this mean that his great great great grandson or daughter will  have his very  strength bestowed in them ?

This phils day off was different from my last because this time I can clearly demonstrate my findings and can always refer back to them. Also I found this active learning move interesting because it related more to myself and my own knowledge instead of others. Although it was interesting before it was also easier to make individual connections rather than collective.


Knowledge, Phil’s Day Off – Courtney Mignot


My goal for Phil’s day off was to figure out if it is at all possible to truly know how much there is to learn in the world.

One day at work I asked all my co-workers if they had learned anything new that day. Most of them said no but then one girl said something very interesting. She said she believed that throughout each day we constantly learn new things, sometimes without even knowing. I took some time to really think about what she said and then I realized that I completely agreed with her. Even if we decide to just stay home one day and do nothing, we are actually learning something, we would learn that we are in fact lazy and sometimes like relaxing at home instead of going out.

I still would like to know if it is possible for anyone to ever be content with how much they know or is it human nature to always strive to be more knowledgeable.

This Phil’s day off was different from the last because I felt as if I knew what project to do and what questions to ask to make it more  meaningful. I think I definitely was able to  get more of my questions about Epistemology answered than I was during the Metaphysics unit.



Active Learning – Liam Pringle


After I found my initial question and went through our class discussions I found out that I don’t think about the other perspective as much as I would like to. So my goal for this active learning day was to look and think of things in a different way. On the actual day that I did my active learning I went out and took photographs of my local area. I wanted to look at something that I see all day in a different light, and acquire a new perspective. Will do this activity I found that there is so much more that I couldn’t see before without going farther into it. I feel that I gained a new perspective on my surroundings, if going just a little bit deeper changed my perspective on my everyday surroundings then if I take the time to think about both sides more often then my philosophy work would greatly improve.

I chose to do this activity on my active learning rather then looking deeper in how we learn, so I would like to take some time out in the future and look into this. I find memory very interesting and really want to know what makes us remember something faster and a longer lasting memory. This active learning day was very different from my other active learning day because I actually took time away from my normal schedule to do this learning. As well this active learning day didn’t directly help me with my question, but instead it provided me with a chance to improve my work from here on.


Phil’s Epistemological Day Off – Sydney


My goal was to demonstrate the difference between my sister and I’s experiences even though we were put in the same situation, which would provide an example that shows how knowledge is individual. My Phil’s Day Off experience cemented my idea that knowledge is individualized because it showed me that knowledge really is different from person to person and is based on perception. Because I can’t film exactly what my sister experiences, only she can really do that, it’s sort of like a metaphor for how I could never get in another person’s head and know their experience and therefore never know their knowledge in the way they do.

However, I still do have some questions regarding my topic. Why is it that we can’t exactly know another person’s knowledge? Why is individual perception a thing? Why is there such a thing as experiencing different things? Why can’t we know the exact same thing as another person? I don’t mean these questions as in the answer being “oh, because no one can experience the same thing as another.” I mean it in the way, why is this a thing? Why can’t we experience the exact same thing as another person? Another question I have is, is it possible for collective knowledge to exist without individual knowledge (as in an individual initiating that knowledge)?

This Phil’s Day Off was quite different from my last. On this Phil’s Day Off, I went out with more intention and purpose. I was actively aware of everything that I was doing that day that affected my experience, in comparison to last time where I went about my day blindly and then reflected on which parts could be applicable to philosophy. As well, this time I also have more physical evidence of what I did (an actual video) instead of just word of mouth.


Would you like an Idea with that?

  • Knowledge is inevitable
  • Knowledge is the result of the human ability to learn
  • Knowledge does not reside on a physical plane

There are a two main arguments for what ideas are, and where they come from: independently created by creative minds, or that “ideas do exist outside of space and time, and we grasp them via a special faculty of intuition”

In my article, these possibilities are discussed in a rather interesting way, with more than a little skeptical semantics through the writing.

It entertains the possibility of independent ideas through a rather bizarre idea, that doesn’t quite work the way it was meant to.

If John and Sarah both came to the conclusion that Jessica would make a great president at different times without influence of each other, the idea would have been conceived at two independent moments, and that “we seem committed to ideas as entities that exist independently of particular acts in which we thinking of them, and even of collections of such acts”. It’s bizarre in the way that this could argue for the other side as well, and the fact that they came to the same conclusion was mere coincidence.

After its laughable attempt to convince the reader of its idea, it moves on and discusses some interesting ideas; it relates this idea conundrum to both numbers an colour. If my car is red, where is the line between the redness of the car and the car itself? Is redness not some universal entity? And where should such an entity exist if it did? And how would something interact with it, in order to become red? “And how do particular red things partake of redness?” And finally, and possibly most importantly, did redness exist as a universal quality to obtain before an observer was there to experience it? If it’s some universal entity, where did it originate from?

“But now [the author is] getting long on hunches and short on details. Suffice it to say that, in[the authors view] at least, [the] very good question is still unsettled and unsettling.” It’s impossible to answer the answer, because the only definitive proof we will ever have, is if we somehow manage to observe that giant cesspool of ideas; however, if there is no such thing, we will never have proof for or against this idea, meaning we may never know.