Paper Example on Gettier's Problem

Introduction

In epistemology, the Gettier problem can be explained simply as the landmark philosophy problem that studies our understanding of knowledge. Long head JTB, justified true belief is challenged by the Gettier cases of Gettier type counter examples. According to JTB knowledge is equally justified to true belief if hope, truth and justification conditions are met in a claim. Edmund Gettier tried to illustrate instances where people do end up failing to know despite having a sincere belief in a claim because the reasons for their idea turned out to be false even when they were justified. The Gettier's argument, however, requires the assumption that it is possible for someone to be explained in something that is not true. Thus, is the JTB account for knowledge inadequate? Does it satisfy sufficient and necessary conditions for learning? What is knowledge? This paper analyses and evaluates the Gettier problem in conjunction with JTB. It also attempts at finding a solution for both related cases (Hetherington, 2).

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

It has been argued that the Gettier problem shows the need not introduce a fourth independent condition but instead attempts to build up a different account of knowledge through which the statements conditions have been misguided from the outset. This kind of arguments tries to argue that the terms, evidence, certainty, and justification should be analyzed using an existing or primitive notion of knowledge. For centuries, Gettier problems have been studied by people from varying demographics to blunt their force or adjust JTB knowledge account. What constitutes knowledge is a famous philosophical question. Many people understand knowledge as factive as sort of an embodiment of epistemological tie of belief and truth. Through his counter examples, Gettier tried to argue that JTB account of knowledge isn't true as I said earlier. These cases are actual possible problems or situations where someone has a belief that is supported by evidence, and they know it to be true though according to many (Hetherington, 3) epistemologist their belief doesn't qualify as knowledge. He argued this by saying that there are instances the JTB account is satisfied when a belief is justified and also true but this, however, did not seem to be a case of knowledge that is genuine.

With this argument, it was necessary to conceptualize what the term knowledge meant correctly. The case I and case two counterexamples that argue his case are as follows. Each of this claims relies on two applications. The first claim is that entailment preserves justification and the second that applies to Smith's belief in that Smith believing in T is justified, and he acknowledges that T, s truth entails truth of P, the he is also justified in believing P. His analysis in case 1 and 2 concluded that what defined knowledge could easily be changed and adjusted. This is a problem of first-order logic. He introduced terms such as knows and believes in the discussion that moved the argument to the epistemological field. Responses to case 1 and two have fallen into three categories. Justification replacement response.- the response agrees that with problems that were raised by Gettier cases. The response, however, doesn't invoke the fourth condition, it replaces justification with a new condition that makes his counterexamples obsolete (Shope, 2).

The second response known as fourth condition response does accept problems that were raised by Gettier cases. It also agrees that JTB is necessary even though cannot be sufficiently used to define for knowledge. According to this view, a proper account of knowledge should contain an additional fourth condition. The other fourth condition with similar counter-examples and Gettier counter-examples will sufficiently not work. This is because the fourth condition will provide an adequate criterion and set that will be sufficient and necessary for making these counterexamples obsolete. The last response to Gettier problems is the affirmation of JTB account. The answer does agree with the JTB account for knowledge and disagrees with Gettier cases. The reactions claim that his arguments have insufficient levels of justification (Shope, 3). This response says that the Gettier cases are inadequate because knowledge requires higher levels of explanation.

Responses to Gettier's conclusions can only consist of alternative analyses of the meaning of knowledge. There has been struggling and disagreements at the beginning with the understanding notion of truth, the idea of belief or justifying things that have been naturally and wholly accepted. Since knowledge, truth and defending have not been well defined. As noted by Olsson (59), defining JTB as entirely satisfactory is also problematic on account of examples like the Gettier examples. Another response could also be the belief justified on reasons that it is not possible for that which is untrue to be explained. Conversely, if a proposition turns out not to be true proves that the proposal wasn't in the first place sufficiently justified. In this response definition of knowledge in JTB is true. It shifts the problem from defining knowledge to defining the term justification. One can also view justification and non-justification as non-binary opposites. Instead, reason can be regarding extent or degree. An idea can, therefore, be less or more justified. Gettier cases had propositions that had different levels of justification. They were believed and true but had the weak reason (Olsson, 58). Taking case 1 as an example, the claim that testimony from Smiths boss is strong evidence is dismissed. Because in this case, it all depends on whether the boss is deceitful or wrong hence unreliable. Taking the example in case, Smith accepts an idea that is questionable without detailed justification. The idea was that Jones owned a ford. Both of these two cases have failed to undermine JTB account of knowledge since they lack sufficient reason.

Conclusion

A response to Gettier and a solution is through avoidance of his conclusions. Since there are cases, there is belief without the existence of knowledge it can be hardly argued according to JTB that wisdom is justified true belief. In this case, we can only defuse his counter-examples. To accomplish this, some parameters must be accepted. One must first recognize that his cases are not of real justified belief or knowledge after all. One can also use a case that surrenders the exemplar by eliminating the need for JBT application in a situation where Gettier has been rendered obscure. Through Gettier cases, Smith has a particular belief that is true, but one can argue that his reasons for justifying his truth or this truth were wrong. It can be argued in cases of missing evidence because, Smith's beliefs fail to be known since there is no evidence of him being aware that he will get the job (Olsson, 64).

Works Cited

Hetherington, Stephen. Knowledge and the Gettier problem. Cambridge University Press, 2016.

Olsson, Erik J. "Gettier and the method of explication: a 60 year old solution to a 50 year old problem." Philosophical Studies 172.1 (2015): 57-72.

Shope, Robert K. "Falsity and Rational Inquiry-a Solution to the Gettier Problem and a Perspective on Social Aspects of Knowing." (2017).