Gettier problems or cases are named in honor of the American philosopher Edmund Gettier, who discovered them in 1963. They
function as challenges to the philosophical tradition of defining knowledge of a proposition as justified true belief in that proposition
.
What are Gettier cases meant to show?
Gettier presented two cases
in which a true belief is inferred from a justified false belief
. He observed that, intuitively, such beliefs cannot be knowledge; it is merely lucky that they are true. In honour of his contribution to the literature, cases like these have come to be known as “Gettier cases”.
What is the gettier problem for dummies?
The Gettier problem, in the field of epistemology, is
a landmark philosophical problem concerning the understanding of descriptive knowledge
. Attributed to American philosopher Edmund Gettier, Gettier-type counterexamples (called “Gettier-cases”) challenge the long-held justified true belief (JTB) account of knowledge.
What is a gettier case example?
Another example of a Gettier case can be developed from an example concerning
whether an executive’s secretary is in his office
. Suppose that she looked into the office and saw, sitting behind the desk, a figure who looked to her exactly like her secretary.
What is the problem that all Gettier cases have in common?
Many epistemologists agree that the Gettier problem has something to do with luck—it is argued that all Gettier cases have
a “double luck” structure
(Zagzebski 1966, pp. 288–289; cf. Zagzebski 1994) and that they reveal the centrality of “epistemic luck” to the nature of knowledge (Pritchard 2005).
Is knowledge always true?
Knowledge is always a true belief
; but not just any true belief. (A confident although hopelessly uninformed belief as to which horse will win — or even has won — a particular race is not knowledge, even if the belief is true.) Knowledge is always a well justified true belief — any well justified true belief.
What are true beliefs?
The concept of justified true belief states that
in order to know that a given proposition is true
, one must not only believe the relevant true proposition, but also have justification for doing so. In more formal terms, an agent knows that a proposition is true if and only if: is true.
What is Gettiers argument?
The Gettier problem, in the field of epistemology, is
a landmark philosophical problem concerning the understanding of descriptive knowledge
. Attributed to American philosopher Edmund Gettier, Gettier-type counterexamples (called “Gettier-cases”) challenge the long-held justified true belief (JTB) account of knowledge.
What is a false lemma?
It says
knowledge is justified true belief + that is not inferred from anything false
(a false lemma). This avoids the problems of Gettier cases because Smith’s belief “the man who will get the job has 10 coins in his pocket” is inferred from the false lemma “Jones will get the job”.
What are the three conditions of knowledge?
According to this account, the three conditions—
truth, belief, and justification
—are individually necessary and jointly sufficient for knowledge of facts.
What is the no false lemmas condition?
Under No False Lemmas,
knowledge is restricted to justified true beliefs that are based upon other truths, or facts of the matter
– one cannot just so happen to know something in the way that the JTB definition of knowledge allows.
How do you make a gettier case?
- One way to understand Gettier cases involves knowing how to make them. …
- Step 1: select any false proposition, P, for which some believer A has ample justification.
- Step 2: generalize away from P using a principle of deductive logic to a claim Q that is true but not for the reasons adduced by A in support of P.
What is meant by epistemology?
Epistemology,
the philosophical study of the nature, origin, and limits of human knowledge
. The term is derived from the Greek epistēmē (“knowledge”) and logos (“reason”), and accordingly the field is sometimes referred to as the theory of knowledge.
What are the necessary and sufficient conditions of knowledge?
When talking about knowledge or that someone knows something, usually this knowledge has two necessary and sufficient requirements:
truth, and
.
belief
.
Why is having a belief that is true not enough for knowledge?
True belief is not sufficient for knowledge; since a belief can be true by accident or lucky guesswork, and
knowledge cannot be a matter of luck or accident
. … So knowledge requires justification—i.e., having sufficient reasons for one’s beliefs.
How can we justify our beliefs?
Foundationalism
– Basic beliefs justify other, non-basic beliefs. Epistemic coherentism – Beliefs are justified if they cohere with other beliefs a person holds, each belief is justified if it coheres with the overall system of beliefs. Infinitism – Beliefs are justified by infinite chains of reasons.
