A critique of the traditional and the post-gettier theories of justification: an intervention with epistemological functionalism

In their quest to refute the sceptics’ challenge possibility of knowledge, epistemologists have over years strived demonstrate how our beliefs can be appropriately justified. This paper critically examines two these traditional or anti-sceptical theories justification, namely: Foundationalism and Coherentism, as well three famous post-Gettier justification: Reliability, Defeasibility Causal theories. Notwithstanding relevant contributions in clarifying conditions for justification argues that none attains requirements rational success without vulnerability challenge, since each is nettled with some identified epistemic defects, especially due emphasis on a single fixed idea – preference formal adequacy functional efficacy knowledge claim human inquiry. As way forward, functionalistic framework concludes positive recommendation this perspective more viable alternative approach justification. The expository critical methods philosophical analysis are adopted work.