Plato's definition of knowledge as (JTB) has been a cornerstone of . This concept requires a proposition to be true, believed, and justified. However, the challenges this definition's sufficiency.
proposed scenarios where JTB fails to constitute knowledge. These cases involve true beliefs based on false premises or coincidence. The Gettier problem sparked debates about what additional conditions might be necessary for genuine knowledge.
The Traditional Definition of Knowledge
Components of Plato's knowledge definition
Top images from around the web for Components of Plato's knowledge definition
A Non-Philosopher’s Guide to Plato | Getty Iris View original
Plato defines knowledge as justified true belief (JTB)
Proposition must be true reflects reality accurately
Person must believe accepts the proposition as true
Person must be justified has sufficient reasons or evidence for believing
Each component is necessary for knowledge
Truth ensures the proposition aligns with the actual state of affairs (2+2=4)
Belief requires the person to sincerely accept the proposition (I believe the Earth is round)
Justification demands adequate grounds for believing, such as evidence or reasoning (I saw a globe showing the Earth's shape)
The Gettier Problem
Challenge of the Gettier problem
Gettier problem, proposed by Edmund Gettier, challenges the sufficiency of JTB for knowledge
Gettier cases are scenarios where a person has JTB but lacks knowledge
Typically involve forming a true belief based on false premises or coincidence (winning the lottery based on a dream)
Gettier problem suggests JTB is not sufficient for knowledge
There may be additional conditions necessary beyond JTB ( of the belief)
Analysis of a Gettier case
Consider the following Gettier case:
applied for the same job
Smith has strong evidence Jones will get the job and has ten coins in his pocket
Smith forms justified belief: "The person who will get the job has ten coins in his pocket"
However, Smith unexpectedly gets the job instead of Jones
Coincidentally, Smith also has ten coins in his pocket, unaware of this fact
In this case, Smith's belief is:
True: The person who got the job (Smith) does have ten coins in his pocket
Justified: Smith had strong evidence based on his knowledge about Jones
Believed: Smith genuinely believed the proposition
However, it seems intuitive that Smith lacks knowledge in this case
His belief is only true by coincidence, not because of his justification (lucky guess)
This Gettier case challenges Plato's JTB definition by showing it can be satisfied without knowledge
Responses to the Gettier Problem
Evaluation of Gettier problem solutions
One proposed solution is the "" condition
States that JTB counts as knowledge only if not inferred from any false beliefs
In Smith and Jones case, Smith's belief was inferred from false belief that Jones would get the job
By ruling out beliefs inferred from false premises, aims to eliminate Gettier cases (faulty reasoning)
Strengths of "no false lemmas" condition:
Successfully handles many Gettier cases, including Smith and Jones example
Preserves intuition that knowledge should not be based on false premises (house built on sand)
Limitations of "no false lemmas" condition:
May be too strong and rule out cases of knowledge
Belief might be inferred from false premise but still qualify as knowledge if premise is irrelevant to truth of belief (Columbus believing he reached Asia)
May not handle all possible Gettier cases, as there could be other ways for JTB to fall short of knowledge (misinformation from trusted source)
Approaches to Knowledge
Epistemological perspectives
: emphasizes the role of sensory experience in acquiring knowledge
Knowledge primarily comes from observation and experimentation
: emphasizes the role of reason and innate ideas in acquiring knowledge
Some knowledge can be gained through pure reasoning, independent of experience
: questions the possibility of certain knowledge
Challenges the reliability of our senses and reasoning abilities
: acknowledges that our beliefs and knowledge claims may be subject to error
Emphasizes the importance of ongoing inquiry and revision of beliefs
Types of knowledge
: knowledge that is independent of experience
Examples include mathematical truths and logical principles
A posteriori knowledge: knowledge that is dependent on experience
Gained through observation and empirical investigation