2021•Unpublished venueRequires access

Locke on knowledge and certainty

Jennifer Smalligan Marušić

Open publisher page 2 citations

Abstract

Locke defines knowledge as ‘the perception of the connexion and agreement, or disagreement and repugnancy of any of our Ideas’ (Essay 4.1.2 525). This chapter examines the implications of each part of this definition: why Locke thinks of knowledge as a kind of perceiving, and what he thinks it is to perceive that ideas agree or disagree. It argues that the definition implies that knowledge, for Locke, is propositional, factive, requires belief or high confidence in the content known, and infallible. Finally, it suggests a way of reconciling Locke’s claims that all knowledge is certain and that some kinds of knowledge are more certain than others. The proposed solution is that Locke uses ‘certain’ and related terms in two ways. In one sense, being certain is an all-or-nothing affair. But in the other sense, certainty admits of degrees. In the former sense, all knowledge is certain, but in the latter sense, some kinds of knowledge have higher degrees of certainty than others.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Locke defines knowledge as ‘the perception of the connexion and agreement, or disagreement and repugnancy of any of our Ideas’ (Essay 4.1.2 525). This chapter examines the implications of each part of this definition: why Locke thinks of knowledge as a kind of perceiving, and what he thinks it is to perceive that ideas agree or disagree. It argues that the definition implies that knowledge, for Locke, is propositional, factive, requires belief or high confidence in the content known, and infallible. Finally, it suggests a way of reconciling Locke’s claims that all knowledge is certain and that some kinds of knowledge are more certain than others. The proposed solution is that Locke uses ‘certain’ and related terms in two ways. In one sense, being certain is an all-or-nothing affair. But in the other sense, certainty admits of degrees. In the former sense, all knowledge is certain, but in the latter sense, some kinds of knowledge have higher degrees of certainty than others.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 2 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Locke defines knowledge as ‘the perception of the connexion and agreement, or disagreement and repugnancy of any of our Ideas’ (Essay 4.1.2 525). This chapter examines the implications of each part of this definition: why Locke thinks of knowledge as a kind of perceiving, and what he thinks it is to perceive that ideas agree or disagree. It argues that the definition implies that knowledge, for Locke, is propositional, factive, requires belief or high confidence in the content known, and infallible. Finally, it suggests a way of reconciling Locke’s claims that all knowledge is certain and that some kinds of knowledge are more certain than others. The proposed solution is that Locke uses ‘certain’ and related terms in two ways. In one sense, being certain is an all-or-nothing affair. But in the other sense, certainty admits of degrees. In the former sense, all knowledge is certain, but in the latter sense, some kinds of knowledge have higher degrees of certainty than others.

Key concepts: Certainty, Epistemology, Psychology, Philosophy

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Locke on knowledge and certainty — Research Paper | ScholarLens