Instant Access To 100,000+ Essays!

Everyday claims are made regarding what is known. The beauty of philosophical argumentation comes when the implications of a posited belief are analyzed and it becomes self evident that other beliefs must naturally follow. The philosopher is always entertained when a person states that they believe X and the philosopher knows that X entails Y and makes the statement, “If you believe X then you must believe Y because…” If the philosopher can convince his subject of his reasoning for X entailing Y and convince his subject that Y is absurd then the subject has no option other than to abandon his belief in X. The logic behind the philosopher’s ability to manipulate in the above mentioned scenario lies in the truth of a belief and its implications. Truth is necessarily constricted by the limitations of deductive logic. The question that lies at the heart of contemporary philosophical inquiry is whether knowledge is constricted by the limitations of deductive logic. To claim knowledge of X and given that X entails Y does it follow to claim knowledge of Y? Does it follow to claim knowledge of X when the standards for knowledge have not been fulfilled in regards to Y? Epistemic closure states that knowledge is closed unde