In this world there are things we know and things we do not know. But when can we say we know something? What does it take to have knowledge of something?
To answer the question if justified true belief is the same as knowledge, we need to understand the tripartite analysis of knowledge. This is the classical analysis when we are talking about knowledge, which defines knowledge as justified, true, belief. Here we will get the notions of truth, belief and justification.
After having defined knowledge as to be justified true belief, we will have to look at opponent’s point of view, specifically at the Gettier Cases. I will analyze them and show how they are not a valid refutation of the tripartite analysis since this argumentation involves veritic luck.
After having the notions of the JTB analysis and having seen an opposition to it, created by Gettier, it is necessary to analyze whether Gettier’s objection is a valid one or not. Therefore, we will look at the Goldman analysis of reliabilism, which is supposed to object Gettier’s objection against the JTB analysis. For the purpose of this paper, I will only focus on Gettier’s first case and show how it is not valid when we take a reliabilist’s point of view on this.
The conclusion I aim to achieve in this paper, is to show how the JTB analysis can be refined with the help of the reliabilism and show how its definition is not refutable only through Gettier’s cases.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Knowledge as Justified True Belief
2.1 i. Truth
2.2 ii. Belief
2.3 iii. Justification
3. The Gettier Cases
4. Veritic luck
5. Reliabilism
5.1 i. Objection
5.2 ii. Goldman’s reliabilism
6. Veritic luck vs. Goldman’s reliabilism
7. Conclusion
Objectives and Topics
This paper aims to investigate the tripartite analysis of knowledge—defined as justified true belief (JTB)—and evaluate whether it remains a valid definition in the face of counterarguments. By examining the Gettier cases and Alvin Goldman's theory of reliabilism, the paper assesses whether factual knowledge can indeed be equated with justified true belief or if it requires additional criteria to exclude cases of veritic luck.
- The tripartite analysis of knowledge (JTB)
- The impact of Gettier cases on traditional epistemology
- The role of veritic luck in invalidating knowledge claims
- Alvin Goldman’s reliabilist theory of justification
- Refining the definition of knowledge to resist objections
Excerpt from the book
Veritic Luck
As I mentioned in the previous section of this paper, the Gettier case I analyzed involves some sort of luck. Like I said, Smith was just lucky that he also had 10 coins in his pocket, he did not know he had those coins. Through Luck, his proposition [e] turned out to be true.
The type of luck we are talking about here, is the veritic luck. A person experiences veritic luck if she is lucky “in virtue of the fact that, given her evidential situation, it is simply a matter of luck that her belief turns out to be true”2. This means that Smith has evidence in this world, that leads him to believe something that by veritic luck, turns out to be true. However, his way of thinking could have led him to a wrong answer. His way of forming the belief that [e] must be true because he has evidence for [d], could have turned out to be wrong. If Smith did not have 10 coins in his pocket, both of his claims would be wrong. Because he is the one who got the job, and he did not have 10 coins in his pocket. Therefore, a case where our belief forming method could lead us to one belief that is wrong and one belief that is right, is not knowledge. This could be considered a 50/50 case, where we simply guess a possible claim and hope for it to be true.
We lead from this explanation, that Gettier Cases, and therefore the refutation of the JTB analysis, involve veritic luck.
Summary of Chapters
Introduction: Provides the foundational question of whether knowledge is simply justified true belief and outlines the paper's focus on Gettier's critique and Goldman's reliabilism.
Knowledge as Justified True Belief: Explains the three necessary conditions—truth, belief, and justification—required for a proposition to be classified as knowledge.
The Gettier Cases: Presents Gettier’s challenge, arguing that JTB is necessary but not sufficient for knowledge because some true, justified beliefs are only correct by luck.
Veritic luck: Defines veritic luck as the specific type of chance that results in true beliefs but lacks the reliability required for genuine knowledge.
Reliabilism: Introduces Alvin Goldman’s perspective, defining justification through reliable belief-forming processes rather than traditional JTB requirements.
Veritic luck vs. Goldman’s reliabilism: Compares the two concepts, concluding that Goldman's reliabilist framework effectively eliminates veritic luck, thereby strengthening the JTB model.
Conclusion: Synthesizes the analysis, asserting that JTB remains a valid definition of knowledge when supported by reliabilist criteria.
Keywords
Knowledge, Justified True Belief, JTB, Gettier cases, veritic luck, reliabilism, Alvin Goldman, epistemology, justification, truth, belief, belief-forming method, local reliability, philosophical methodology.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core subject of this paper?
The paper explores the definition of factual knowledge, specifically focusing on whether it can be accurately described as "justified true belief" (JTB).
What are the primary themes discussed?
The main themes include the tripartite analysis of knowledge, the challenges posed by Gettier cases, the phenomenon of veritic luck, and the application of reliabilism as a solution to epistemic skepticism.
What is the central research question?
The paper seeks to answer: "Is factual knowledge simply having a justified true belief? If not, what is it?"
Which scientific method is employed?
The author uses analytical philosophy, specifically through conceptual analysis and the evaluation of arguments (such as Gettier’s thought experiments and Goldman’s reliabilist theory).
What topics are covered in the main body of the work?
The work covers the definitions of truth, belief, and justification, the Gettier objection regarding luck-based truth, and how Goldman’s reliabilist framework helps refine the JTB model.
Which keywords best characterize the work?
Key terms include Justified True Belief (JTB), Gettier cases, veritic luck, and reliabilism.
How does the author define veritic luck?
Veritic luck is defined as a scenario where a belief happens to be true due to luck, given the individual's evidential situation, rather than through a reliable process.
How does Goldman’s reliabilism defend against Gettier’s criticism?
Goldman argues that for a belief to be justified, it must be produced by a reliable belief-forming process that is consistent across the actual world and nearby possible worlds, effectively filtering out coincidental truths.
- Citar trabajo
- Sabrina Fiel Abade (Autor), 2021, Is factual knowledge simply having a justified true belief? If not, what is it?, Múnich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/1031223
