Essay #1: Final Draft
(We do not have a posterior sense of common-sense world)
Since the ancient civilization, great philosophers have tried to understand and define
what knowledge is and how people gain knowledge. Many of them failed to answer this
question, but others like Descartes or Locke succeeded to reach their own conclusions.
Through 400 years, epistemologist tried to unite their opinions and define knowledge
universally; however, as the epistemology is such a subtle area of study, philosophers have
still failed to reach united answers. Modern epistemologists are mostly separated into two
groups, which are an empiricist and a rationalist. Empiricists argue that our knowledge solely
based on posteriori knowledge; however, I choose to believe that human don’t have posteriori
knowledge, instead, they gain knowledge from deduction and reasoning, which is priori
As the definition of posteriori knowledge can be subtle, I should clarify this
philosophical term first. Posteriori knowledge of common-sense is knowledge gained by
everyday experience using senses. At this term, senses can be visionary, auditory, olfactory,
gustatory, or tactile which person perceive from outside world. When I checked and defined
this term myself, the first question that bothered me was that is it really possible that people
can gain knowledge, justified true belief, through senses? Senses can surely provide
information and ideas; however, in my personal opinion, they cannot justify certain belief. If
the certain belief cannot be justified, it cannot be called as knowledge.
The first reason that there is no posteriori knowledge is because senses, which are
major elements of posteriori knowledge, act as merely part of priori knowledge. Once people
gain information through senses, it should go through process called justification in order to
be declared as knowledge; however, senses cannot organize reasons or make a deduction.