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. Back to the point, these cases have known to be called “Gettier cases.” They ultimately demonstrate that having a justified, true belief is necessary, but not sufficient for knowledge. These Gettier cases …show more content…
Too much luck does not result in knowledge. In his 1948 book, Bertrand Russell exemplifies how true belief fails to count as knowledge by illustrating a Gettier case of a broken clock. Sam is in a train station and looks at a clock and sees the hands of the clock pointing directly to 1:00 pm. He sees this and believes it is 1:00 pm. It turns out Sam’s belief is true; it is in fact 1:00 pm. Sam’s is justified in believing it is 1:00 pm. But Smith doesn’t know that the clock is broken, and the clock’s hands happen to be pointing at the right time. Because the true belief and justification are not formally related to each other, knowledge is impossible to attain in this Gettier case. Sam does not actually know the time because he is justified in believing the clock is working but turns out to be false. Sam just happens to look at the clock in one of few moments when the clock is not wrong. This case is all pure luck because Sam does not know it is 1:00 pm. He happens to be at that train station, looking at that particular clock, and at the specific time of 1:00 pm. Because there is simply too much coincidence in this Gettier case and there is a false belief, solving the Gettier problem remains
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. Back to the point, these cases have known to be called “Gettier cases.” They ultimately demonstrate that having a justified, true belief is necessary, but not sufficient for knowledge. These Gettier cases …show more content…
Too much luck does not result in knowledge. In his 1948 book, Bertrand Russell exemplifies how true belief fails to count as knowledge by illustrating a Gettier case of a broken clock. Sam is in a train station and looks at a clock and sees the hands of the clock pointing directly to 1:00 pm. He sees this and believes it is 1:00 pm. It turns out Sam’s belief is true; it is in fact 1:00 pm. Sam’s is justified in believing it is 1:00 pm. But Smith doesn’t know that the clock is broken, and the clock’s hands happen to be pointing at the right time. Because the true belief and justification are not formally related to each other, knowledge is impossible to attain in this Gettier case. Sam does not actually know the time because he is justified in believing the clock is working but turns out to be false. Sam just happens to look at the clock in one of few moments when the clock is not wrong. This case is all pure luck because Sam does not know it is 1:00 pm. He happens to be at that train station, looking at that particular clock, and at the specific time of 1:00 pm. Because there is simply too much coincidence in this Gettier case and there is a false belief, solving the Gettier problem remains