Michael

It's exactly that. "A" is "p" and "B" is "p ? q".

I believe that A is true. I believe that B is true if A is true. Therefore, I believe that B is true. B is true. Therefore, I have a true belief, even...

How is it different? I believe that X entails Y, I believe that X is true, and so I believe that Y is true. But X isn't true. This is the same as in S...

But when I described my thought/belief processes that led me to believe that Donald Trump is the President you said it didn't matter. You're moving th...

And Smith can arrive at "p ? q" without going through "p". He could have believed "q", just as I could have believed "Donald Trump won the most electo...

I know they're not equivalent. They're two different things that Smith believes, just as "Donald Trump is the President" and "Donald Trump is the Pres...

Yes, he does. But he also has a true belief, and that is an issue. You can keep repeating that Smith believes that p ? q is true because p is true, bu...

But only to those that pay for it.

2 and 4 are two separate, albeit related, beliefs. 2 is a true belief and 4 is a false belief. Yet again, it doesn't matter if I believe that Donald T...

Now you're just being pedantic. I was fleshing out your claim. You said: " that p v q is true because p is". There are two different ways to interpret...

You wrote it in the text I quoted.

Again, you're conflating "Smith believes that 'p ? q is true because p is true' is true" with "Smith believes that 'p ? q' is true because Smith belie...

No, I'm claiming that Smith believes that p ? q is true, that Smith is justified in believing that p ? q is true, and that p ? q is true. He has a jus...

You're conflating "Smith believes that 'p ? q is true because p is true' is true" with "Smith believes that 'p ? q' is true because Smith believes tha...

So Smith believe that p ? q is true. And Smith is justified in believing that p ? q is true. And p ? q is true. Therefore, Smith has a justified true ...

You're conflating again. Believing that p ? q is true is not the same thing as believing that p ? q is entailed by p. I can believe that p ? q is enta...

You mean this reason? That's simply false. Let's say that q is "creativesoul is over 40 years old". You're saying that I can only believe that q could...

Smith doesn't need to believe that both are true. It's a disjunction, not a conjunction. Your arguments are making less and less sense.

Your claim that Smith's belief that p ? q is true is just the belief that p ? q is validly inferred from p. It isn't. As you make clear here, there's ...

Yes he can. Take, for example: 1. My name is Michael or my girlfriend is having a shower (p ? q) 2. My name is Michael or my girlfriend is having a ba...

And it's wrong. Again: 1. I am a woman 2. I am a woman or London is the capital city of England My belief that 2 is true isn't just a belief that 2 is...

How so? What part of my post do you disagree with? Gettier is using the inclusive or, not the exclusive or, as the exclusive or doesn't follow from p....

I don't think so. If I did, I misspoke. g, h, and i are all believed to be true, and could all be true (if Jones owns a Ford). But in Gettier's exampl...

Yes, I've already explained the difference. 1. I am a woman 2. I am a woman or London is the capital city of France I believe that p ? q is validly in...

You can explain why A punched B by describing the movement of particles (including the particles of the brain) or you can explain why A punched B by d...

And to believe that a disjunction such as "Jones owns a Ford or Brown is in Barcelona" is true is to believe that one statement or the other correspon...

How should we define "theft"? On the one hand we might define it as unlawfully taking someone else's property, in which case the premise is false. On ...

So let's say that I know that my girlfriend is in the bathroom washing. I believe that the disjunction "she's having a shower or she's having a bath" ...

In terms of grammar I would say it's a proposition. But if you want to define a proposition as a truth-apt sentence, then non-cognitivists would say t...

No. And neither does it make sense to say that a conclusion is valid. Arguments are valid or invalid; propositions (whether premise or conclusion) are...

Propositions are inferred, but they are not inferences. This is an inference: 1. Socrates is a man 2. All men are mortal 3. Therefore, Socrates is mor...

This isn't mutually exclusive. He has a justified true belief that g, h, and i follow from f and a justified true belief that g, h, and i are true.

Because propositions are not the sort of things that are valid or invalid. Inferences are valid or invalid. Propositions are true or false. g, h, and ...

And Gettier would agree. The problem is that Smith has a justified true believe in g, h, and i. Therefore, the JTB definition of knowledge is lacking.

g, h, and i are not the sort of things that can be valid or invalid, as I keep saying. Inferences are valid, not propositions. g, h, and i are proposi...

He does take it into proper account. Smith believes that f is true. Smith knows that g, h, and i follow from f as per the rules of inference. Therefor...

He does take that into account. It's right there in your quoted passage: "Each of these propositions is entailed by (f). Imagine that Smith realizes t...

p ? q isn't an inference, and so isn't the sort of thing that is valid. It's a proposition that is either true or false.

And he also believes that p ? q is true.

Yes he does. He believes that r follows from p, that p is true, and so that r is true. This doesn't make any sense. Inferences are valid, not proposit...

It's more than this, as I explained here. You can believe that r follows from p and believe that r is false, and you can believe that r follows from p...

That's how governments happen. A small community works together, with a select few being chosen as the leaders ('cause people will always disagree on ...

The Family Guy episode Tea Peter has something like this. The town government gets shutdown, things turn bad when it becomes a free-for-all, and soon ...

Well, we live in democracies, so the government we have is the government we've elected. If you don't like it then vote for an anarchist who promises ...

Angles. Heh.

I think they think that they need to do this to dissuade the U.S. from trying to attack them.

I see how it begins. I'm addressing your reductionist account of it. You say that to believe that p ? q is true is just to believe that if p is true (...

Cons: Russia has Kompromat on Trump, and are using it as a threat to coerce him into doing what they want. Of course, maybe they're lying. But if Trum...

It's also to believe that p ? q is true. Why is this so hard for you to understand? Smith believes that the proposition "Jones owns a Ford or Brown is...

Take, for example, the following claim: 1. It is wrong to steal. From this, we can infer: 2. It is wrong for me to steal Using your logic, all I'm doi...