Traditionally, epistemology has been defined as the theory of knowledge in which the primary goal has been to obtain truth while avoiding false beliefs . Knowledge was defined and universally accepted to be “Justified True Belief”. However, this was challenged when Edmund Gettier released a 1963 paper which demonstrated that justified true beliefs are intuitively not sufficient for knowledge due to epistemic luck. This sudden revelation triggered “a cottage industry of knowledge-analysers” , all of whom were unsuccessful in their attempts to overcome or bypass the Gettier cases by defining a fourth ‘anti-Gettier’ condition. A number of philosophers, dissatisfied with the problem-oriented ‘Post-Gettier’ approach , proceeded to apply virtue theories to epistemology which seek to define epistemic concepts via examination of the person rather than the belief. This normative approach, labelled Virtue Epistemology, has led to a proliferation of works centred on intellectual virtue and renewed interest in the Value problems, which are concerned with the reasons behind knowledge being more valuable than true beliefs and justified true beliefs.
…show more content…
As such, this Independent Study will examine and evaluate whether the arguments put forth by Linda Zagzebski solve some of the current problems faced by traditional analysts and thus provide a better account of knowledge. It will thereafter examine the possibility of shifting the focus in epistemology to include other epistemic goals such as understanding and whether it is a fruitful alternative or complementary approach to
As such, this Independent Study will examine and evaluate whether the arguments put forth by Linda Zagzebski solve some of the current problems faced by traditional analysts and thus provide a better account of knowledge. It will thereafter examine the possibility of shifting the focus in epistemology to include other epistemic goals such as understanding and whether it is a fruitful alternative or complementary approach to