Justified True Belief Analysis

Superior Essays
In this paper, I will explain the Justified True Belief (JTB) analysis of propositional knowledge and provide a counterexample to it. I will then verify that the Casual Theory (developed by Alvin Goldman) is to a certain extent the correct analysis of propositional knowledge. The motivation behind my thesis is to prove that JTB, first established by Plato completely fails to analyse propositional knowledge, and the essay will highlight the facts how it fails to do so when answering the question.

The JTB analysis of knowledge states how propositional knowledge is analysed. Propositions are true or false and are things we believe and assert, such as ‘1+1=2’ or ‘the time is 11:04 AM’, and the JTB analysis defines how propositions are gained and
…show more content…
Goldman states that perception and memory are the ‘appropriate’ casual connections for causing S’s belief that P; therefore with the lost dog case – the Gettier objection can be averted. This is because through perception, as in the lost-dog case when you saw the rock (which you thought was the dog) in the field, you believe the dog is in the field and the fact that there is a dog in the field causes the belief in the ‘appropriate’ way. Instead of the justification belief then, which is certainly susceptible to Gettier counter-examples, the casual theory replaces it and thus becomes immune to Gettier cases. This is because propositional knowledge, according to the casual theory requires no justification, and the knowledge is explained by what caused the belief instead. Hence, this is why the casual theory dislodges the traditional assumption ‘that epistemological questions are questions of logic or justification, not casual or generic questions’ (Goldman, 1967 …show more content…
Because the casual-theory rejects justification as a condition in the analysis of knowledge, the casual-theory nicely handles the standard Gettier cases. This is because the casual theory does not require that one be able to state one’s justification for believing that P. This makes it easy to account for one’s knowledge of propositional facts whose justification one has forgotten. Moreover, the Gettier cases like the lost-dog case I established before, were the result of some inference that was made from a premise that was considered a justified belief, but not about something true (that being in the lost-dog case, seeing the rock and thinking it was the dog). The massive advantage of the casual theory is its ability to eliminate inferences (a conclusion reached on the base of evidence and reasoning) that begin with a false proposition, such as in the lost-dog case seeing the rock and thinking it was the dog because there is a casual connection which causes the justification of the belief and links it with the truth of the

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Case: Katzenbach v. Grant 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46756 *; 2005 WL 1378976 Facts: The Plaintiffs, Katzenbach and Osuna filed a lawsuit against Defendant Grant over a film and book rights. Grant owns a website called “thenightexposed” (www.thenightexposed.net). The Plaintiffs claim that Grant caused problems with negotiations with Sony Pictures and the USA Network. Plaintiff further claims that Grant sent a letter calling Osuna book a fake and made other defamatory articulations about the Plaintiffs on his website.…

    • 1106 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    The purpose of the Theaetetus is to examine how the mind accounts for knowledge by seeking an answer to the question Socrates poses to Theaetetus, what is knowledge? (146A). After a few failed attempts at answering, Theaetetus posits that knowledge is true opinion (187B). Socrates responds that in order for one to know what true opinion is, he must also account for false opinion in the mind. Ultimately, while the dialogue produces no operative definition for knowledge, Plato employs this dialogue to sharpen his arguments for what are and are not the brackets of knowledge.…

    • 1871 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In William James', “The Will to Believe, James provides a defensive response to religious faith regarding W. T. Clifford's position in his essay, "The Ethics of Belief" (James, 2001). Within his stance, James suggests that his views have a somewhat broader scope that Clifford’s (Princeton University, n.d.). Moreover, that in certain cases, it is not only permissible but inevitable that a person’s passional, non-rational nature will determine that person’s belief (Princeton University, n.d.). In summary, James presents that anything that is proposed for our belief is a hypothesis and that any question about which of the two hypotheses to accept is a person’s option (Princeton University, n.d.).…

    • 1184 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Traceel Andrews Paper # 3 Is Justified True Belief Knowledge? – Edmund Gettier Gettier paper argued that for a thought to be considered justified there needs to be a necessary condition and that a third condition needs to be introduced for S to believe namely Q. Gettier talks about three other philosophers ideals and states that their ideas are wrong. Plato’s Theaetetus and Meno In Theaetetus, Plato through Socrates fumble with what knowledge is.…

    • 1027 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    James and Pascal’s defences of faith in some of their most famous arguments, specifically Pascal’s, devalue faith by making faith selfish, providing an obvious out to faith, and making the decision of faith into a gamble, oddly, his devaluation of faith does not hurt his argument, it makes it easier to convince the skeptics. To prove that Pascal’s argument devalues faith and to understand why it doesn’t negatively affect his argument, it’s necessary to understand the whole argument. His argument can be split into quite a few premises. He starts with the possibility of God, which is the main idea of his argument. Basically, it’s possible that God does exists, and it’s also possible that God does not exist, something nearly everyone agrees on.…

    • 1025 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In “Reasonable Religious Disagreements,” Richard Feldman posits that two reasonable peers cannot come to a reasonable disagreement. The premise of a “reasonable disagreement” has various conditions, in short being that the peers must be epistemic, and they must have shared all of their evidence pertaining to the argument. By this criteria, it is not plausible for two epistemic peers with access to the same body of evidence to ever reach reasonably different conclusions. However, a problem arises with the previously stated criteria when examining the point regarding full disclosure of evidence. When examining Feldman’s article from this perspective, it is possible that it may not be considered fully viable.…

    • 797 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Specific purpose: To persuade the audience that ADHD medications are not a crutch to gain will power. It is a medication which truly helps individuals with ADHD. Introduction I. Attention: I am a squirrel running around looking for an almond, and hiding my acorns in places I can’t find. Inattention problem?…

    • 1152 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Clifford and James are two philosophers who have contradicting opinions on whether having sufficient evidence is always necessary to believe in something. Where Clifford believes you cannot believe in anything without sufficient evidence, James believes that if the evidence doesn’t point in one way or another, it is justified to believe something based on our will. I will be arguing that James’ side is indeed correct. In James’ paper, he provides concrete evidence as to why his opinion is correct.…

    • 1154 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Karolina I. Pellot Ortiz Professor Matthew Goodwin English 3221-705 September 17, 2015 Faith Based on Cultural Opinion Is there truly one simple way to explain a religion? Which opinion is right and which one is wrong? These are the types of questions that you, or anyone else, might ask when trying to describe your religious beliefs.…

    • 2017 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Great Essays

    Russell’s The Problems of Philosophy focuses on the theory of sense Data in the common world. Sense data is referenced as part of the very reason Knowledge exists and is understood by the human brain. Russel references arguments to many other philosophers in argument for sense data against other philosopher’s ideals like Descartes whose famous Cogito argument in conjunction with his Evil Demon argument directly interferes with Russell’s theory of Sense data. In this essay I will be showing and analyzing Russell’s theory of Sense Data and how Russell contradicts Descartes theories of the Cogito argument and the Evil Demon Hypothesis. I will also be giving my opinion on which if the Sense Data argument is more believable than the Cogito and Evil…

    • 1551 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Great Essays

    Defense, Critique and Integration of the 4 Apologetic Methods Defense of Fideism To approach apologetics is to seek to fulfill the command of Scripture “always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you” In light of this, the believer ought to approach apologetics as the overflow of their relationship with Jesus. Approaching apologetics from the fideist perspective is to embrace the mystery and paradox of knowing God in faith, rather than through an extended philosophically rooted line of reasoning. Instead of using human means to explain the reality which is far above human understanding, fideist seek to share their encounter with Jesus, the ultimate reality, rather than attempting to…

    • 2020 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    In the last Chapter, Rachels discusses the creation of a "Satisfactory Moral Theory”, in this paper I will discuss my own creation of the Satisfactory Moral Theory. The moral theories are supposed to help us decide what are the right and wrong actions, but, not all the moral theories are perfect. We may feel that a certain conclusion to a problem is fair or unfair, but what theory do we use to make judgments?. I will start with the cultural relativism theory, to understand different cultures, There is a need to know that one community’s beliefs and practices are not usually the same as the other community. In fact, cultural relativism seems the most applicable approach to be taken on for communications purposes.…

    • 1181 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Goldman’s account of inferential knowledge is similar to the conservative accounts because both types of accounts try to remove false beliefs from the analysis of knowledge, to strengthen it. They both revolve around the problem presented by Gettier; the ability to use false beliefs in the traditional analysis of knowledge to make claims of knowledge. However, his account is unlike the conservative accounts because instead of adding to the third requirement or adding a fourth, Goldman intends to create a third requirement that uses the causal theory. His account of knowledge is; S knows that p if and only if the fact p is causally connected in an ‘appropriate’ way with S ’s believing p. Goldman’s account of inferential knowledge is unlike the…

    • 1585 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Cogent Argument Analysis

    • 1166 Words
    • 5 Pages

    An argument is cogent if (1) each premise is acceptable [A], (2) the premises, in combination, are relevant to the conclusion [R], and (3) the premises, in combination, provide adequate grounds for the conclusion [G]. The purpose of the essay is to explore through the concept of cogency, and to determine if the given argument, “Should American students who understand the theory of evolution be given a lower grade for not believing in it?” , is cogent. In order to do so, the argument must be evaluated by going through the ARG conditions, and if the argument successfully passes these conditions, then the argument may be determined as cogent.…

    • 1166 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Solving the Gettier Problem American philosopher Edmund L. Gettier challenges the way knowledge is analyzed in his famous 1963 paper “Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?” Gettier writes two cases in his paper, which illustrate that knowledge is more than just true belief and justification. As a side note: when I refer to the term “justification,” readers should know that justification is different from one person to another. Also, justification can change throughout time (Mason, “D. Knowledge 1”). Justification requires having good reasons.…

    • 1751 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays