Summary:
In the video, he gets in depth about reality and if it is real or not. He touches on the fact that behavior is not necessarily related to reality. Someone's behavior describes psychological processes, not the world as a whole. He talks about reality existing separately from consciousness and that if we can't prove that, how can we assume it.
Atheists will only believe in the existence of god if it is empirical evidence. Empiricism is the measure of acceptable evidence but empiricism cannot justify itself. Thus, atheists that only accept empirical evidence of a god but not of reality separate from consciousness are showing favoritism.
The nature and limits of consciousness behold us from controlling what appears to us as reality. The things that have us question and doubt reality also must exist in reality. How could you use the reasons for doubting the existence of reality if you obtain those reasons from reality? To use reality to doubt reality is contradicting.
Analysis:
As he mentioned that behavior is merely psychological, I felt befuddled. In psychology, I learned that behavior is affected by both nature (biology) and nurture (environment). So, his statement didn't make much logical sense to me seeing as it's been proven that behavior is not just psychological. The outside world affects people by an abundant amount.
Citation:
(n.d.). Atheism, reality and epistemology . [Print Photo]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJUisM6q_DM&feature=youtube_gdata  

Summary:
Coherentism is the view of the structure of knowledge and justification.

Summary:
While many skeptics say it is pointless to ask questions we know cannot be answered, Russell still insists on questioning your curiosity. "...he courageously asked each of us to dare to think, to dream, to wonder, to care about each other, to search for the truth, and to engage in the quest for knowledge." said John Shosky. Russell believed the same as Descartes, that you can isolate certain things you know cannot be true.  He looked at philosophy from a scientific way as well, saying that if we take a scientific approach, we will get closer to the truth. '"Ensure a progress in method whose importance it would be impossible to exaggerate."' says Russell. Russell made two very important contributions to philosophy; the theory of descriptions and the theory of types.
Analysis:
Russell says to question everything, but why? Why should we question things we know cannot be answered? At this moment, I am questioning the act of questioning. Is that ironic or are my actions contradicting my beliefs? How can Russell take a scientific approach to philosophy? Science is based on uncovering facts (or at least what we call "facts") and philosophy asks mysterious questions.
Reflection Questions:
Why bother questioning? Why is taking an analytical approach towards philosophy thought to be wrong by Russell?
Citation:
Shosky, John. "Russell and the Contemplation of Philosophy." Free Inquiry. Fall 1995: 41-42. SIRS Renaissance. Web. 16 Apr 2012.

Summary:
There are two ways philosophers look at knowledge:
     1) Humans can know everything
     2) Humans can know nothing
Most philosophers don't agree with either.  Firstly, they think there is a finite amount of knowledge one can know, and secondly, we at least know some things. The idea of knowing nothing is called skepticism. Most skeptics have to watch how they share their theory that knowledge is non-existent because saying that they "know" that it is true would be contradicting their claim.
Rene Descartes examined certainty and its roots. There is indubitability, the absence of possible doubt about correctness, and infallibility, the absence of any real possibility of error. (Moser , Mulder & Trout, 1998)
Analysis:
After reading about the different ways of interpreting knowledge, I can't say I agree with either theories. How can one have no knowledge at all yet still write and study various theories? But, how can one prove that that is knowledge and not imagined?
Citation:
Moser , P., Mulder, D., & Trout, J. (1998). The theory of knowledge. (pp. 5-9). New York, NY: Oxford University Press, Inc.

The project has given me the opportunity to question and study theories that fascinate me to a great extent. I can't wait to search for the answer to me essential question and come across other theories that are just as intriguing.

Summary:

This video basically sums up what epistemology means and deals with. Epistemology is the study of knowledge and justified beliefs. A famous philosopher, by the name of René Descartes, has a quote known worldwide: "I think, therefore I am." By this he meant that he knows he exists, but can't prove if  anything else does, even his legs.
 

Analysis:

The video leaves me with many questions. An example from the video about a cup; "Is this real or just a prop, or neither real nor a prop?" From this example the woman says we cannot prove if the cup exists. Well, how can anyone prove that you exist? Or, how can you prove that your imagination is real/exists? Is what you see real or a figment of your "imagination?", if that even exists.

Citation:
ROCKETBOOM. (n.d.). Epistemology [Video file]. Retrieved from Youtube database.

Summary:
In a few pages of The Theory of Knowledge: A Thematic Introduction, the authors talk about what the average person is expected to know, what they know, and what they don't know. But, they also say that when talking about beliefs, us as humans, like to support them with our own evidence. And when being told information, we often question the person telling us, asking "where did you get that information?". We wouldn't want to be told information that isn't valid.


The word "epistemology" derives from the Greek words "episteme" meaning knowledge and "logos" meaning theory or explanation. The study of knowledge goes way back to ancient Greek times with Plato and Aristotle. In Theaetetus by Plato, he writes about Socrates and how he questions his teachers' knowledge and why they are considered experts.


Also, different cultures may view epistemology in various ways. For instance, some might emphasize the social nature of knowledge where as others might study individuals in isolation.


Reflection Questions:
How did one find the study of knowledge? Where did it originate from?

Citation:

Moser, P. K., & Mulder, D. H. (1997 ). Epistemology: A First Look. In The Theory of Knowledge: A 

     Thematic Introduction (pp. 1-5). (Original work published 1997 )