What can we say about knowledge? Well, first of all, we need to try to identify what knowledge is or what type of knowledge there is. I believe we can identify it in three ways: propositional knowledge, procedural knowledge or know-how, and personal knowledge. Propositional knowledge is the knowledge of facts and truths about something or acquired knowledge. For example, I can know that two plus two is four, I cannot know that two plus two is five because it is not known, it does not exist. Let's also take the example of building an engine: you have to learn or have learned to build the engine to have the knowledge necessary to build it. Procedural knowledge is a lot like propositional knowledge in that you have to take the knowledge you have learned and apply it. he. Without actually applying propositional knowledge, you cannot have procedural knowledge. Take the engine building knowledge from before, you don't really know how to build an engine without actually doing it. You can learn and read everything without really knowing how to apply it. It's not about pretending that you know it, but that you actually have the skills to do it. Finally, personal knowledge, in this sense, is being familiar with something. To know someone, you have to have met them. To know love, you must have experienced it. The word “know” is used to mean knowledge by knowledge. To put this into standard premises, we could say that knowledge is: "If I know P then P is true and I believe P", but there is a problem because I can believe that I will win the lottery but I do not can't prove it. We can modify it by saying: "If I know P, then P is true and I truly believe P." By truly putting it there, it means that the belief must be based on...... middle of paper ... ...t of him in which there was no reality, but it was simply a projection that the demon put into his mind. He also believed in the dream argument. How do we know we are in reality and not dreaming? We have good reason to believe that these two arguments do not concern our reality, but how can we really know? The strong point of the evil demon argument is that no one can say that we are not possessed by demons; The sad reality is that it is neither scientifically sound nor logical to think this way. With the dream argument, there is no need to be fundamentally strong. You can find many fallacies and counterexamples that would support the opposite, such as lucid dreamers and shared experiences. It seems that modern philosophers have found a way to break both arguments, making them seem weak. Once again, the question arises as to how one can actually know, in the sense of a belief.?