The Tripartite Definition of Knowledge

Question 1

What is a belief?

Answer 1

A proposition with an attitude of affirmation (something you think is true)

Question 2

What is a true belief?

Answer 2

A belief which coincides with reality

Question 3

What is a justified true belief?

Answer 3

A true belief which has evidence to support it

Question 4

What is the TDK, in a sentence?

Answer 4

A person S knows that P if and only if S has justified true belief that P

Question 5

What does the phrase ‘if and only if’ mean?

Answer 5

That the conditions must be sufficient AND necessary

Question 6

Outline Gettier’s argument in three premises

Answer 6

(1) If knowledge is JTB, then it is not possible for a person to have JTB that P and not have knowledge that P
(2) There are cases where people have JTB that P but do not know that P
(3) Knowledge is not JTB

Question 7

What example does Gettier give of a person having a justified true belief, but not having knowledge?

Answer 7

The Smith and Jones case. In this case, the two men are applying for a job. Smith is lead to believe by a company director that Jones will get the job, and then sees Jones putting 10 coins in his pocket. He concludes that ‘the man with 10 coins in his pocket will get the job’. Due to a change of events, Smith gets the job, and subsequently finds 10 coins in his own pocket. Though his conclusion that ‘the man with 10 coins in his pocket will get the job’, is true, Smith did not have knowledge that this would be the case.

Question 8

Identify three examples of someone having JTB but not knowledge, other than the Smith and Jones case.

Answer 8

The station clock case, the bees case, and the twins case.

Question 9

What is the ‘infallibilism’ response to Gettier?

Answer 9

A person S is justified in believing that P if and only if S is infallible about P. The claim is that Smith’s justification was not infallible, and there was still a chance that he would get the job, despite the director’s hint.

Question 10

Evaluate the ‘infallibilism’ response to Gettier.

Answer 10

It raises the bar on justification too high. It threatens to make many reasonable justifications inadequate, seriously reducing the amount of things we think we know.

Question 11

What is the ‘no false lemmas’ response to Gettier?

Answer 11

A person S’s belief that P must not have been inferred from any false proposition. In the Smith and Jones case, Smith’s belief is derived from the false lemma ‘Jones will get the job’.

Question 12

Evaluate the ‘no false lemmas’ response to Gettier.

Answer 12

One false lemma in amongst many true ones may not be of significance, though this response claims that it would prevent knowledge, seriously reducing the amount of things we think we know.

Question 13

What is the ‘reliabilism’ response to Gettier?

Answer 13

A person S knows that P only if S’s belief that P was formed though a reliable cognitive process. Smith’s belief was created from the director’s hint, which is not a reliable source.

Question 14

Evaluate the ‘reliablilism’ response to Gettier.

Answer 14

What exactly is a ‘reliable cognitive process’? If the process had to be 100% reliable, this would seriously reduce the amount of things we think we know, as few sources, even our own sight, are 100% reliable.

Question 15

What is the ‘epistemic virtues’ response to Gettier?

Answer 15

A person S knows that P only if S’s belief that P was formed through the exercise of epistemic virtues. The claim is that Smith’s belief was formed without the exercise of epistemic virtues (e.g. good memory, curiosity, good judgement).

Question 16

Evaluate the ‘epistemic virtues’ response to Gettier.

Answer 16

The epistemic virtues are somewhat vague. They are also rather elitist, suggesting that you have to be intelligent to have knowledge.

Question 17

What is Nozick’s ‘tracking the truth’?

Answer 17

A person S knows that P only if if P were not true, S would not believe that P.

Question 18

Give an example of knowledge without truth. Is this truly a case of knowledge?

Answer 18

The flat earth case. People used to think that the earth was flat; it looked flat (justification), and they believed it was flat (belief), however, of course, it was not true that it was flat. This seems to be a case of knowledge without truth. However, from examination of other cases, it is clear that truth is a necessary condition for knowledge - people BELIEVED the earth was flat, but they didn’t KNOW it.

Question 19

Give an example of knowledge without belief. Is this truly a case of knowledge?

Answer 19

The Mr Turner case. Richard is called to the front of Mr Turner’s history class and asked ‘what year did Queen Victoria die?’. He has no idea what the answer is, but blurts out ‘1901?’. Richard is correct, and he is justified, but he did not have belief of his answer. This seems to be a case of knowledge without belief, though if you were to ask Richard if he knew when Queen Victoria died, he would say no. This clearly shows that Richard did not truly possess knowledge.

Question 20

Give an example of knowledge without justification. Is this truly a case of knowledge?

Answer 20

The God case. Many theists would claim that they know that God exists, though they may not have any justification for this belief. In a world where God does exist, it seems that this is a case of knowledge without justification. However, is it not just a lucky guess/coincidence that the theist believes in God and God also exists? It seems as though a true belief without justification is a lucky guess, rather than knowledge.