Four Conditions for Knowledge Essay -- Essays Papers

Four Conditions for KnowledgeI. In this paper, I offer a solution to the Gettier problem by adding a fourth condition to the reassert true t to each oneing analysis of friendship. First though, a brief review. Traditionally, have intercourseledge had been delineateed for with the reassert true precept analysis. To know something, three conditions had to be met first, you had to behave a belief second, the belief had to be justified third, this justified belief had to be true. So a justified true belief counts as knowledge. Gettier however showed this analysis to be inadequate as peerless freighter have a justified true belief that no one would want to count as knowledge. In the first Gettier counter moral, metalworker is justified in believing that Jones is the man who will reward the conce rn. Smiths also justified in believing that Jones has ten coins in his pocket. From that he infers and has a justified belief that the man who will get the job has ten coins in his pocket. It turns out that the man who gets the job is not Jones scarce Smith, and Smith does in fact have ten coins in his pocket. Smith has a justified true belief that the man who will get the job has ten coins in his pocket. However, this shouldnt count as knowledge. In the second Gettier counterexample, Smith is justified in believing Jones owns a Ford. Therefore, hes justified in believing Jones owns a Ford or Brown is in Barcelona. Turns out, Jones doesnt own a Ford alone Brown is in fact in Barcelona. Once again, we have an example of a justified true belief that shouldnt count as knowledge. ... ...eliefs(a) Im in a community of barn facades.(b) That looks ilk a barn(q), his belief that he sees a barn, isnt justified, though. Therefore, Dom fecesnot know (q). The inte rnalism of my account is obvious. Whats required for justification of (q) is different for Henry and Dom because of eachs belief about the kind of environment he is in. It is the belief about the environment and not the environment that matters. In other words, two people could be in the exact same circumstances only if what required for justification would be different because of the beliefs they have. Causal accounts of knowledge cant account for why Henry is justified for (q), but Dom is not. My account is not a causal account as is shown in the Dom transmutation above, my account has no problem accounting for the different justifications required for Dom and for Henry.