Summary of TEORÍA del CONOCIMIENTO desde la filosofía

00:00:00 - 00:20:00

The video discusses the history of knowledge, with emphasis on philosophical concepts of knowledge. Various thinkers throughout history have addressed the concept of knowledge, with the Philosophes being particularly important. According to Plato, knowledge is a form of identification, meaning that to know something is to identify similarities between it and other things. Later, with the arrival of the Scientific Revolution, philosophers began to address the question of knowledge in a more scientific manner, focusing on questions such as how knowledge is acquired, and what makes something knowledge. The Philosophes' ideas had a significant impact on the development of modern philosophy, with Plato's theories concerning knowledge of Forms (an immaterial realm beyond the senses) being particularly influential.

• 00:00:00 The video discusses the history of knowledge, with emphasis on philosophical concepts of knowledge. Various thinkers throughout history have addressed the concept of knowledge, with the Philosophes being particularly important. According to Plato, knowledge is a form of identification, meaning that to know something is to identify similarities between it and other things. Later, with the arrival of the Scientific Revolution, philosophers began to address the question of knowledge in a more scientific manner, focusing on questions such as how knowledge is acquired, and what makes something knowledge. The Philosophes' ideas had a significant impact on the development of modern philosophy, with Plato's theories concerning knowledge of Forms (an immaterial realm beyond the senses) being particularly influential.
• 00:05:00 In the video, screencia verdadera y justificada, philosopher and theologian Agustín de Hipona discusses the theory of knowledge from philosophy. He argues that knowledge has a divine origin and that each individual is interested in knowing the truth, which comes from God. He also refers to an anthropological and religious theory of knowledge, in which knowledge is understood as knowing what is alike. These philosophers, namely Galileo, Galilei, and Kepler, hold to part of the idea that knowledge is knowing what is like. For them, knowledge is based on the understanding of mathematical operations being similar to reality. Hegel, another philosopher of the modern era, views knowledge as encompassing both physical and non-physical sciences.
• 00:10:00 Schopenhauer argued that knowledge of the external world is obtained through a sensitive nature directed by what he called the will, a metaphysical force that moves all nature. One does not know nature only conceptually or mathematically, but also experientially through sensation to the extent that one is part of nature. Schopenhauer's emphasis on the philosopher called "Immanuel Kant" led to the idea that our knowledge is limited to the phenomena and does not reach knowledge of the thing in itself. Later, in the 20th century, debate arose over whether philosophy should reflect on the process from considering it an individual and psychological process, or as a social product shared by many individuals. While psychology and physiology focused on finding causal processes that led to knowledge from sensation and personality, philosophy focused on specifying conditions for something to be considered knowledge and questioning how knowledge justifies itself. Out of these positions, one can say that some contemporary theories of knowledge begin from positions rejected by Plato's theory of knowledge, that knowledge must be a true and justified belief, among other things. These positions are formulated as propositional thoughts and possess prior cognitive beliefs--that is, mental thoughts--even though having a belief does not always produce knowledge. There are two examples given to make this point. The
• 00:15:00 The video discusses the theory of knowledge from philosophy. It is true that one has the right to be sure when they believe they know something, but being sure of knowing doesn't make one know really. In that case, false beliefs exist, true beliefs. This way, one cannot say that a person knows something if they have a false belief about what they are asserting. Even if they have a true but unsupported belief, they cannot say that they know anything. In fact, if they have a true but unsupported belief, they would not be able to provide reasons that make their belief true, since a true belief must have reasons. This is because a belief must have evidence to support it, and evidence cannot come from chance or intuition. Another problem with saying someone knows something when they have a true but unsupported belief is that it is not clear when knowledge becomes a false belief based on wrong reasons. For example, someone who believes that there will be a earthquake in the end of this year in a specific place cannot know this simply by saying they feel something bad is going to happen. Even if this were to be the case and there was an earthquake or natural disaster at the end of this year, the person would not be able to say that they knew this simply
• 00:20:00 The video discusses the epistemology and theory of knowledge from philosophy. It points out that knowledge is not limited to scientific knowledge, and that there are many areas of knowledge that involve scientific knowledge. One example is the creation of an ordered system of logic and even the criticism of the concept of knowledge. The video also discusses the work of philosophy in the area of theory of knowledge.