Authentic Gettier cases: a reply to Starmans and Friedman.

Taking 'know' for an answer: a reply to Nagel, San Juan, and Mar.

Nagel, San Juan, and Mar report an experiment investigating lay attributions of knowledge, belief, and justification. They suggest that, in keeping with the expectations of philosophers, but contra recent empirical findings [Starmans, C. & Friedman, O. (2012). The folk conception of knowledge. Cognition, 124, 272-283], laypeople consistently deny knowledge in Gettier cases, regardless of whethe...

The folk conception of knowledge.

How do people decide which claims should be considered mere beliefs and which count as knowledge? Although little is known about how people attribute knowledge to others, philosophical debate about the nature of knowledge may provide a starting point. Traditionally, a belief that is both true and justified was thought to constitute knowledge. However, philosophers now agree that this account is...

Williamson on Gettier Cases in Epistemic Logic and the Knowledge Norm for Rational Belief: A Reply to a Reply to a Reply

In our reply to Williamson, we offered models where traditional Gettier cases arise but which differ from Williamson’s models in three related respects: first, non-traditional, fake-barn style Gettier cases do not arise in our models; second, knowledge iterates in our models; and, finally, our models do not have the Moorish consequences of Williamson’s models.1 Predictably, Williamson thinks th...

Creation in judgments about the establishment of ownership

Knowledge Judgments in “Gettier” Cases*

Gettier cases have played a major role in Anglo-American analytic epistemology over the past fifty years. Philosophers have grouped a bewildering array of examples under the heading “Gettier case.” Philosophers claim that these cases are obvious counterexamples to the “traditional” analysis of knowledge as justified true belief, and they treat correctly classifying the cases as a criterion for ...