ipl-logo

Edmund Gettier's Justified True Belief Theory

804 Words4 Pages

Long before philosopher, Edmund Gettier came along, knowledge was thought to be equal to justified true belief, which is to say that: “You know p iff, i) p is true, ii) you believe that p, iii) and you are justified in believing that p” (Gettier, 1963)
However, Gettier argued that ‘p’ cannot simply be known because you are justified in believing that ‘p’. He proposed several counter-examples to the Justified True Belief theory (JTB theory) and they are known as Gettier cases. In this paper, I aim to explain how a Gettier-style case spells trouble for the view that knowledge is justified true belief. Gettier’s main objective wasn’t to solve the mishaps behind the JTB theory, however other philosophers took it upon themselves to use Gettier’s …show more content…

Each of his cases rely on the premises not necessarily having to be true, but by chance it being true. To exemplify, in the case of the ‘fake barn country’, it was by sheer chance that the man was standing in front of one of the very last standing barns which then made his belief a JTB. Gettier’s main point of argument was based on the factor of sufficiency when it came to the JTB theory. He was skeptical on the fact that a mere justification of a belief was adequate to identify knowledge as this would mean that a truth can be implied by a falsehood producing a false …show more content…

Also known as counterfactual conditions, the two conditions are ----. If I then apply Nozick’s theory to the previously mentioned Gettier-style case of the barn country, the proposition ‘the man is looking a real barn’ can be further analyzed:
The man knows that he is looking at a real barn iff:
i) He is in fact looking at a real barn, ii) He is justified in believing that it is a real barn,
The first two conditions hold thus far, however, the third condition is when one can start to understand the lack of true knowledge in the Gettier case: iii*) If the man was not looking at a real barn, he would not believe that he was looking at a real barn. But, in this case, the man did not realize that almost all the other barns were fake, therefore, he would not know the difference. The man has no real knowledge of whether he is looking at a real

Show More
Related
465 Words | 2 Pages

Id. Relocation of the condition does not make a difference in its condition. Id. Norton demonstrates that Herrera is entitled to judgment as a matter of law in this action. Like the hedge in Norton, Herrera’s land art remained a natural condition—despite its relocation. In Norton, the property owners planted a hedge. Relocating a hedge does not change the fact that it still remains a hedge.

Read More
823 Words | 4 Pages

It was a lot of ideas going around on what he was trying to prove and who he was trying to prove it

Read More
932 Words | 4 Pages

There is much belief to suggest that we can depend on our senses unless there is just cause or evidence suggested to question their reliability. Therefore, the belief of reality may be subjected to interpretation or skepticism, but without solid evidence to discard what we believe to be true, we should be confident in what we hold to be true. Skepticism or Justified True Belief

Read More
524 Words | 3 Pages

Her second premises states “If I can conceive of a particular scenario occurring, then that scenario is possible” (306) and in her paper, she breaks it down. She asks the question: is something actually possible just because I can conceive it? In the beginning of her article she discusses a “thought experiment” which she laid out a few examples of possible scenarios, one being “you have never encountered a married bachelor.” She takes this scenario apart and says to try to imagine an unmarried bachelor, and “you find you cannot because you cannot conceive of a married bachelor because your concept bachelor includes the concept unmarried, and nothing that satisfies that concept can simultaneously satisfy the concept married” (305). The idea to conceive an unmarried bachelor is not possible because a bachelor is unmarried.

Read More
1680 Words | 7 Pages

This means Clifford was an evidentialist. William James argues that sometimes it is allowed to believe without sufficient evidence. Before a logical argument can be made for either William James or W.K. Clifford one must first

Read More
771 Words | 4 Pages

In this essay, Elbow leans towards the believing game and tries to persuade the reader to leave the doubting game behind. Elbow states rules for each game that are used to form a plausible conclusion. The

Read More
1261 Words | 6 Pages

While this can seem quite complicated to follow, Gettier supports his claims by presenting two specific cases. In this paper, I will refute Gettire’s argument against JTB as knowledge through the lack of justification and persuasiveness in his cases. In the first case, we are presented with two characters, Smith and Jones, who have both applied for the same job. It is stated that Smith has evidence for a proposition, which we will call A, that 1) Jones is going to get the job and 2) Jones has ten coins in his pocket.

Read More
862 Words | 4 Pages

In this paper, I will deliver a reconstruction of Descartes’ Cogito Argument and my reasoning to validate it as indubitable. I will do so by justifying my interpretations through valid arguments and claim, by showcasing examples with reasoning. Rene Descartes is a French Philosopher of the 17th century, who formulated the philosophical Cogito argument by the name of ‘cogito ergo sum,’ also known as “I think, therefore, I am.” Rene was a skeptic philosopher amongst many scholastic philosophers of his time. To interpret his cogito argument as indubitable and whether it could serve as a foundational belief, he took a skeptical approach towards the relations between thoughts and existence.

Read More
112 Words | 1 Pages

Edmund Gettier is quite confusing in his story “Is Justified True Belief Knowledge”. He says that there are many cases where you have a story and it gives you the run around with the facts. Saying that this is true only if this certain thing is true and if that is not true the second or third thing down that list is true. He has good examples in his paper but is that always the case will there always be adequate evidence for the explanation for the reasoning to be wrong and move on to the next possible explanation. So he is able to justify if his other reasoning’s are proved wrong.

Read More
756 Words | 4 Pages

Some feel very strongly about what they know to be certain. Some feel certain about religion, others about love. In Oscar Wilde’s book The Picture of Dorian Gray a character, Lord Henry Wotton, says this, : “The things one feels absolutely certain about are never true. That is the fatality of Faith, and the lesson of romance” (181). The truth one knows does not always prove to be certain.

Read More
1000 Words | 4 Pages

However, if the standard is low in context, then deviating outlooks are ignored for their unlikelihood. This makes (3) false, since one has a clear perception and knows it is not a brain-in-a-vat. This standard also makes (1) true, as there is a clear perception that there is a

Read More
752 Words | 4 Pages

Clifford believes you need enough evidence to believe in something because belief is a false sense of hope that causes doubtful actions which could cause a spiral of projected situations that can lead to either good or bad outcomes. These outcomes could have officially been avoided if such “belief” never existed and the first projection was actually proved. I believe he is right because without solid evidence, a belief could cause a domino effect of situations which could easily been avoided. It is just unreasonable to have a belief and not have confirmation to back it up. Obviously it would require some serious energy to really evaluate these cases, but in the end of the day you will have

Read More
509 Words | 3 Pages

John Collier demonstrates that Big Simon is a convincing character as he is convincing with his consistency of actions, is clearly motivating in what he does, and is lifelike as he tries to manipulate Small Simon. In “Thus I Refute Beelzy,” Big Simon is a convincing character with his consistency of actions when he tries to manipulate Small Simon. Big Simon does this when he tries to tell

Read More
1600 Words | 7 Pages

I find that areas of knowledge based on sense perception often require constant consensus and consistent disagreement to ensure that the developed knowledge is robust. Alternatively, if the main way of knowing is faith, such as in religion or mathematics (believing in the closed axiomatic system), then there is no disagreement, yet the claims are irrefutable because they are based in faith, and as such, once accepted allow knowledge to be created and justified through all standards of truth. My response to this claim that “robust knowledge requires both consensus and disagreement” is that I agree with a modified version of this title, that robust knowledge from areas of knowledge based in sense perception requires both consensus and

Read More
737 Words | 3 Pages

One of the main features of this theory is that "truth” consists

Read More

More about Edmund Gettier's Justified True Belief Theory

Related Topics

Open Document