Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
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.
Justification is a property of beliefs insofar as they are held blamelessly. In other words, a justified belief is a belief that a person is entitled to hold. Many philosophers from Plato onward have treated "justified true belief" (JTB) as constituting knowledge.
The definition of knowledge as justified true belief is often discussed in the academic literature. An often-discussed definition characterizes knowledge as justified true belief. This definition identifies three essential features: it is (1) a belief that is (2) true and (3) justified. [21] [b] Truth is a widely accepted feature of knowledge ...
Critics of the justified-true-belief view, like Edmund Gettier, have proposed counterexamples to show that some justified true beliefs do not amount to knowledge if the justification is not genuinely connected to the truth, a condition termed epistemic luck.
According to the so-called traditional analysis, [f] knowledge has three components: it is a belief that is justified and true. [43] In the second half of the 20th century, this view was put into doubt by a series of thought experiments that aimed to show that some justified true beliefs do not amount to knowledge. [44]
Edmund Lee Gettier III (/ ˈ ɡ ɛ t i ər /; October 31, 1927 – March 23, 2021) was an American philosopher at the University of Massachusetts Amherst.He is best known for his article written in 1963: "Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?", [1] which has generated an extensive philosophical literature trying to respond to what became known as the Gettier problem.
In the seminal 1963 paper, “Is Justified True Belief Knowledge? ”, Edmund Gettier gave an assumption (later called the “principle of deducibility for justification” by Irving Thalberg, Jr.) [6] that would serve as a basis for the rest of his piece: “for any proposition P, if S is justified in believing P and P entails Q, and S deduces Q from P and accepts Q as a result of this ...
Reformed epistemology – Beliefs are warranted by proper cognitive function—proposed by Alvin Plantinga. Evidentialism – Beliefs depend solely on the evidence for them. Reliabilism – A belief is justified if it is the result of a reliable process. Infallibilism – Knowledge is incompatible with the possibility of being wrong.