Explore UCD

UCD Home >

PHIL20490

Academic Year 2025/2026

Knowledge & Scepticism (PHIL20490)

Subject:
Philosophy
College:
Social Sciences & Law
School:
Philosophy
Level:
2 (Intermediate)
Credits:
5
Module Coordinator:
Assoc Professor Daniel Esmonde Deasy
Trimester:
Autumn
Mode of Delivery:
On Campus
Internship Module:
No
How will I be graded?
Letter grades

Curricular information is subject to change.

"A common refrain heard around New Scientist‘s offices in recent weeks has been “episte… what?!” Even among educated and well-informed people, epistemology – the study of knowledge – is neither a familiar word nor a well-known field of enquiry. But it has never been more important."

New Scientist Editorial, 29 March 2017.

This course provides an introduction to epistemology: the study of knowledge (the name 'epistemology comes from the Greek words 'epistēmē', meaning 'knowledge', and 'logos', meaning 'science or study of'). Epistemology has always been one of the central areas of philosophy, and it has a great deal of relevance both theoretically and practically. The purpose of this course is to help you understand some of the core questions and theories of epistemology, and to think about epistemological questions for yourself so you can form your own independent views about them.

Why is epistemology so important? Because knowledge is generally seen the primary goal of inquiry, whether in ordinary life (I want to *know* when the bus will arrive) or in any area of expertise (I want the doctor to *know* what's wrong with me, and the mechanic to *know* how to fix my car). But what exactly do want when we want to know something, or when we want someone else to know something? What's the difference between knowing something, and just having an opinion about it? (The difference matters: I hope the surgeon *knows* how to do the operation, rather than just having an opinion about it!) Does knowing something require believing it? Can you know something that's not true? In other words, what exactly *is* knowledge?

Philosophers have been especially interested in the question of what knowledge is, because if we can answer that question, we can start to answer another important question about knowledge: what do we really know? What sort of knowledge is possible? For example, many philosophers throughout history have argued that we can't know what the objects outside our own minds are *really* like; they argue that we can only know how things outside our minds *seem* to us, or how they impact on our senses. According to these philosophers, our knowledge of the world outside our minds never really extends beyond our own private sensations. This idea—that we are, to some extent, trapped in our own sensations—has been a recurring theme not only in philosophy in both the East and West, but in different global religions and in science fiction.

The philosophical view that we can't know anything (or anything much) about the world outside our own private sensations is called 'scepticism'. But even if we reject scepticism, there are questions about knowledge we still have to answer. For example, there are questions about the different *sources* of knowledge. Is perception is a source of knowledge, and if so, how? Is memory a source of knowledge, and if so, how? Is reason by itself a source of knowledge, and if so, how? And there are questions about how we can know certain kinds of things. For example, how do we know what's morally right and wrong? How do we know what's possible and impossible? How do we know about the future? Epistemologists address these questions, and more.

There is also an important connection between knowledge and evidence. It's natural to think that in order to know something, we have to have reasons for believing it—in other words, we need to have some *evidence* in support of our belief. But how strong does our evidence have to be to give us knowledge? Can someone know something without having *any* evidence for it? Do we need reasons for accepting our evidence—in other words, do we need evidence for our evidence? What form does evidence have to take? For example, do we have to be able to reflect on our evidence in order to have knowledge? Can a group of people know something based on 'shared evidence'? Can babies and animals have knowledge, and if so, what does that tell us about the relationship between knowledge and evidence, or about the nature of evidence?

Many of the traditional questions and theories of epistemology are focussed on knowledge from a largely theoretical perspective. But recently there has been a much greater (and welcome) focus in epistemology on the *social* and *ethical* dimensions of knowledge. For example, the philosopher Miranda Fricker argues in her 2007 book *Epistemic Injustice* that there is a specific kind of injustice that involves holding certain people to higher standards of evidence because of their social identity (for example, their gender or ethnic identity). Others have argued that whether we should believe something doesn't just depend on whether it is rational to do so, but whether believing it would contribute to social structures of injustice. In both cases, questions of knowledge are connected with ethical questions concerning injustice and oppression. And epistemology also has a political dimension. For example, what exactly do people mean when we say that 'conspiracy theories', 'fake news', and 'epistemic bubbles' pose a threat to democracy? What sort of epistemic duties do individual people—as opposed to e.g. governments and private companies—have in an environment that contains lots of bad information?

The course is divided into two halves. In the first half, we address some of the traditional questions in epistemology, such as: what is knowledge, and how does it relate to belief? What is the relationship between knowledge and evidence? Should we take scepticism seriously?

In the second part of the course, we address questions concerning the *social* and *ethical* dimensions of knowledge, such as: can religious belief be considered rational? Are there ethical as well as rational standards of belief? What is feminist epistemology, and how does it differ from 'traditional' epistemology? Is our modern environment hostile to knowledge? Are there forms of injustice specifically connected with the transmission of knowledge?

A very good introduction to epistemology is Jennifer Nagel's *Knowledge: A Very Short Introduction* (Oxford University Press). If you'd like to see last year's syllabus, please just email me at daniel.deasy@ucd.ie.

About this Module

Learning Outcomes:

If you seriously engage with this course, you'll learn to:

1. Critically reflect on classic and contemporary debates in epistemology.
2. Identify key concepts and theories in epistemology, and show awareness of potential problems that have led to the refinement of those concepts and theories in the course of the relevant debates.
3. Interpret and understand some classic and contemporary texts in epistemology.
4. Write well-structured and well-argued philosophical essays that explain and critically assess the key concepts and theories introduced in the module.
5. Respond to constructive feedback on your arguments and views.
6. Articulate your own responses to philosophical views, support them with reasons, and defend them in light of potential objections.

Indicative Module Content:

The module is divided into two halves. In the first half (Weeks 1-6), we'll address the following questions:

1. WHAT IS KNOWLEDGE? What exactly is knowledge? Is it possible to provide a strict definition of what it is to know something?
2. PERCEPTUAL KNOWLEDGE: Is perception a source of knowledge? If so, what exactly is it knowledge of?
3. EXTERNALISM & INTERNALISM: What is the difference between ‘epistemic internalism’ and ‘epistemic externalism’? Why does it matter? What are the reasons for believing either view?
4. SCEPTICISM: Can we really know anything about the world outside of our own private experiences?

For an introduction to some of the topics of this half, see here (copy and paste this link into your browser):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_Y3utIeTPg&t=123s

In the second half of the course (Weeks 7-11), we'll address the following questions concerning the social and ethical dimensions of knowledge:

5. RELIGIOUS BELIEF: Does religious belief require evidence in order to be rational? If so, what form might this evidence take?
6. THE ETHICS OF BELIEF: Do the epistemic standards governing rational belief depend on moral considerations?
7. FEMINIST EPISTEMOLOGY: What is feminist epistemology? How does it differ from 'traditional' epistemology?
8. HOSTILE EPISTEMOLOGY: Do features of our environment exploit our epistemic vulnerabilities? If so, what can or should we do about it?

For an introduction to some of the topics of this half, see here (copy and paste this link into your browser):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4AybWp4O8Q

Student Effort Hours:
Student Effort Type Hours
Lectures

24

Tutorial

7

Autonomous Student Learning

94

Total

125


Approaches to Teaching and Learning:
1. TEACHING

In Weeks 1 and 12, there are two lectures on Monday and Wednesday and no tutorials. In Weeks 2-7 and 9-11, there is one lecture a week on Monday and one small-group tutorial. One of the tutorials is led by the lecturer and the rest by Philosophy graduate students who are experts in this area.

Lectures involve a presentation by the lecturer and some in-class discussion. Lectures are an essential part of the learning for this module. You should plan to attend all the lectures, since there is no better way of learning the module material, keeping up with the details of the module, and (perhaps most importantly) helping yourself to feel in control of your learning.

In tutorials you'll have the opportunity to discuss and debate the week's readings and the lecture material and ask any questions you have. Tutorials will always involve some writing with a pen and paper, so please make sure to bring what you need. The written work you complete in your tutorial must be handed to the tutor at the end of the meeting, and will be read by the tutor afterwards. Your attendance and participation at the tutorials will be confirmed by receipt of your submitted written work, but you will not receive a grade for your work; the grade for tutorial attendance and participation is based only on your sincere participation in the tutorial exercises.

2. LEARNING

Learning for this module is centred around lectures, reading material, discussion and debate, and writing.

You'll be expected to read short set texts in advance of the lectures, attend lectures, and actively participate in tutorials. You'll be supported in your learning by lecturers and tutors, by email, and in set office hours. You'll be supported in your exam essay writing by a lecture and reading materials on how to write a good philosophy essay, examples of good essays, essay writing practice in tutorials, and feedback on an essay plan.

Requirements, Exclusions and Recommendations

Not applicable to this module.


Module Requisites and Incompatibles
Incompatibles:
PHIL20290 - Knowledge and Reality


 

Assessment Strategy
Description Timing Component Scale Must Pass Component % of Final Grade In Module Component Repeat Offered
Exam (In-person): Written Exam End of trimester
Duration:
2 hr(s)
Graded No
70
No
Participation in Learning Activities: Tutorial Attendance and Participation. Week 2, Week 3, Week 4, Week 5, Week 6, Week 7, Week 9, Week 10, Week 11 Graded No
30
No

Carry forward of passed components
Yes
 

Resit In Terminal Exam
Spring No
Please see Student Jargon Buster for more information about remediation types and timing. 

Feedback Strategy/Strategies

• Feedback individually to students, on an activity or draft prior to summative assessment
• Feedback individually to students, post-assessment
• Group/class feedback, post-assessment
• Peer review activities

How will my Feedback be Delivered?

1. The lecturer and tutors will provide feedback on essay plans 2. The essay plans be returned with written feedback. 3. After the essay plans have been submitted, there will be group/class feedback from the lecturer/tutor. 4. Students will have the opportunity to engage in self-assessment activities in tutorials.

There is no set-text for this module, but here are some excellent introductory texts in epistemology:

• Descartes, R. (1641). Meditations in First Philosophy. Penguin Classics.
• Nagel, J. (2014). Knowledge: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press.
• Pritchard, D. (2014) What Is This Thing Called Knowledge? (3rd Edition) Routledge.
• Littlejohn, C. & J. A. Carter (2021). This Is Epistemology. Routledge.

If you'd like to see last year's syllabus, please just email me at daniel.deasy@ucd.ie.

Name Role
Misha Goudsmit Tutor
Ms Rachel Russell Tutor
Philipp Wagenhals Tutor

Timetabling information is displayed only for guidance purposes, relates to the current Academic Year only and is subject to change.
Autumn Lecture Offering 1 Week(s) - 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12 Mon 11:00 - 11:50
Autumn Lecture Offering 1 Week(s) - 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12 Wed 12:00 - 12:50
Autumn Tutorial Offering 1 Week(s) - 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12 Tues 16:00 - 16:50
Autumn Tutorial Offering 2 Week(s) - 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12 Wed 15:00 - 15:50
Autumn Tutorial Offering 3 Week(s) - 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12 Mon 13:00 - 13:50
Autumn Tutorial Offering 4 Week(s) - 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12 Tues 12:00 - 12:50
Autumn Tutorial Offering 5 Week(s) - 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12 Mon 16:00 - 16:50
Autumn Tutorial Offering 6 Week(s) - 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12 Wed 14:00 - 14:50