Knowing What to Know

Modern theory of knowledge is baffled by discovering a foolproof systematic method of differentiating true knowledge from false. Without knowing what to know and what to reject we will be overwhelmed in our age of massive volumes of information. Determining the truth from falsehood is essential to guide global human society to holistic success. Yet, without resolving this fundamental philosophical question, the modern world feels lost.

Classical epistemology states that to have knowledge of a proposition like “the earth is round” requires that the statement is true by our belief of it based on some justification. Since we believe that the earth is round based on observation from space, we can classify this as knowledge.

Unfortunately, the classical theory breaks down when we consider the problem the philosopher Gettier uncovered. He showed that even if we believe that a proposition is justified as true it might have just been true by luck. In fact, such statements should not be classified as knowledge. As an example, consider a stopped clock that shows the correct time of the day by chance that a person looks at it at the right time. The proposition that the “clock shows that it is 10 O’clock” is believed to be true by the person justified on his observation. The fact that it is indeed true does not mean that can be classified as being knowledge as you cannot get to tell the time by looking at a stopped clock. It was just by chance that the person looked at the clock at 10”.

How can philosophers decide if information can be classified as true knowing that there exists information out there that can be justified and believed to be true whereas it was only true by chance when it was being observed? This has confused philosophers as to what exactly is knowledge. They do not have a general theory of knowledge which they can apply universally to classify information as true knowledge.

How can humanity be sure what to believe? How can we be protected from delusions of the information deluge of our age? Can there be a general theory of knowledge? The Islamic paradigm provides answers to such elusive questions. In the Islamic paradigm, there are two sources of knowledge – this world and that world (the unseen world). Absolute knowledge comes from divine revelations. They provide natural basic principles which are universally at work in both the worlds. When we observe phenomena in our environment, we observe cause and effect rationally, guided by the principles of revelation, e.g. the fact that the revelations say that every man shall taste death, makes us exclude research into immortality as it is based on false knowledge that “man can live forever”.

To be classified as knowledge a proposition should be believed to be true when justified by universal principles either directly from revelations or by rational observation guided by such principles. If rational observation shows that something is true while revelation shows something is false, we believe it is false e.g. even if our previous knowledge that the divine command instructed dipping a fallen fly in a drink might seem irrational, we accept is as true knowledge. Rational observation can help take us to the truth but rational observation is not infallible. It cannot sit in judgement of the truth. This removes classifications of delusions like those into the realm of knowledge which is the problem with coming up with a universal theory of knowledge in modern philosophy.

Thus, we can attempt to improve the general theory of knowledge with the help of the Islamic paradigm. A proposition is believed to be true if it can be justified through rational observations in the light of divine revelations or by divine revelations alone. Islam acknowledges mankind’s ignorance with only Allah being All Knowing. Even with this theory, there might be propositions which cannot be completely classified not by the weakness of the theory but by human deficiency to find the justification. With this improved epistemology, humanity can be more confident as to what is true and false increasing them in conviction and avoiding delusions. This would result in better guidance of our global society which has lost the capability to judge right from wrong.