Page 1 : 3:07 lid @ Qe Sule, there are many debates regarding the definition of justification. According to one, theory, what makes a belief justified is the possession of evidence - a belief is, justified to the extent that it fits a person's evidence. According to another, any, reliable cognitive process (e.g. vision) of gaining knowledge is sufficient justification, in itself. There are also debates as to whether justification should be external or, internal. Externalism holds that there are factors other than those which are internal, to the believer which can affect the justificatory status of a belief. The examples of, , such external factors could be one’s social context and the political and economic, environment available to one., , Internalism, on the other hand, claims that everything necessary to provide, , , , justification for a belief is immediately available in a person's consciousness without, having to resort to external factors. The examples of such internal factors would be the, immediate access a person has to his/her beliefs., , 3. What are the limits of knowledge? In addition to the nature of knowledge,, epistemologists concern themselves with the question of the extent of human, knowledge: how much do we, or can we, know? It has been suggested that we do, not, or cannot, know anything, or at least that we do not know as much as we think, we do. Such a view is called skepticism. One might be a skeptic only with regard to, certain domains, such as morality, or the external world. Such a skeptic is a local, skeptic, as contrasted with a global skeptic, who maintains that we cannot know, anything at all. Also, since knowledge requires that our beliefs be both true and, justified, a skeptic might maintain that none of our beliefs are true or that none of, them are justified. The strength of any epistemological theory can be measured by, the extent to which it is able to avoid or encounter the skeptic’s challenges., , 4. Problem of Truth and validity of knowledge:- It is not a question of where our, knowledge comes from, but whether it is valid when we get it. In general form it is, the problem of the relation of our ideas to the world of reality. As like, correspondence theory of truth which conceive that truth as an relation between an, ideas and the world. It introduces us to the famous dispute between the Realists and, the Idealists. The problem which we have now to discuss is simply the question, whether the world is in itself a distinct independent reality or whether it is just, reflection of our minds, an idea, a perception, a mental construction. To the former, belief the world Realism is applied, to the latter the term Idealism., , 5. Method logical Problem:- When we analyze the origin of knowledge, we consider, that rationalists emphasized on deductive and demonstrative procedure in the, acquisition of knowledge. While empiricists relied on induction . Apart from this, Hegel applied the dialectical method for the acquisition of knowledge., , In the last we can say that knowledge is not a simply a true belief. It required a, justify condition some contemporary epistemologists suggest that all justify belied depends, for their evidential support on some unjustified belief., , lI O <