“It is always by favour of Nature that one knows something” -Wittgenstein (1975)
Edmund Gettier questioned the accepted and existing notion of propositional knowledge which was defined as Justified True Belief (JTB). According to justified true belief, for a premise (p) can be considered knowledge (K), if and only if the individual has belief in the premise (Bp), believes the premise to be true (Tp) and is supported by justification (has enough evidence to believe that p is true (Jp). So,
Kp↔ Bp +Tp + Jp
Gettier, through the use of two cases, proves that the existence of justified true belief does not guarantee knowledge. In other words, that justified true belief is not a
…show more content…
There is a lot of corruption within the FIFA Organization.
Jeeves information is in fact, true. The news channel blames the corruption for the cancellation. So, Jeeves arrives at the conclusion:
K: The venue for the 2018 FIFA World Cup is going to be changed because of corruption. However, in an effort by FIFA to suppress the news about the corruption, it was made sure that all the news channels telecasted the unbearable weather conditions in the host country as the reason for the change. Incidentally, the news channel that Jeeves watched is the only one that broadcasted the corruption as the actual reason for the change in venues. While all the members of his football club believe that climatic conditions were the reason for the change of venues.
Although Jeeves arrived at K from P, this belief, according to Gettier, would not be considered knowledge as it was an accident that Jeeves watched the specific news channel that broadcasted the actual news. He landed on the truth through accident and sheer luck and that negates his knowledge, K. So, even though K is true, Smith believes that K is true and is justified in believing so, he does now know that K is