Michael

This isn't in conflict with what I had for 2: 2. From 1, my belief that p ? q is justified. You haven't shown this to be false.

And that each of those propositions are true. Yes. And he's justified in believing that p ? q. And p ? q is true. He has a justified true belief. No, ...

I don't even know what you're asking. He believes that p ? q is true because he believes that p is true. What more is there to say? If his belief that...

I have read it. I addressed your confusion here. There's a difference between just believing that p ? q is a valid inference from p and also believing...

Smith doesn't believe that Brown is in three different locations. Your argument is based on a false premise. Try again.

Of course it's about the content of g, h, and i. I believe that "London is the capital city of England and/or pigs can fly" is true because of the con...

None of that addresses Gettier.

Or it's that he believes that the disjunction describes some fact about the world, like the disjunction "either there's something in your pocket or yo...

He's also justified in believing that they are true. In fact, even if he isn't justified in believing p, his accepting the inference as valid is justi...

7. Jones owns a Ford 8. Jones owns a Ford or Brown is in Barclelona 9. Jones owns a Ford or Brown is in Boston Smith doesn't just believe that 8 and 9...

When you say "so Smith's belief that p v q is 'true'(valid)". His belief isn't just that p ? q is a valid inference from p (as with 2 from 1 above), b...

You're mixing up truth and validity. To repeat the previous example: 1. London is the capital city of France 2. London is the capital city of France o...

Yes, which is what Gettier said. And there is no problem with this. Furthermore, if he really is justified in believing p, then because those three se...

I know the distinction between being valid and true. The sentences are both true, because London is the capital city of England. Compare with: 1. Lond...

They don't contradict each other. I don't know why you keep claiming that they do. Again, both of these are true: 1. London is the capital city of Eng...

It should be clear that by "accept" Gettier means "accept as true". They could all be true, and would all be true if Jones owns a Ford. Just as both o...

That's redundant. It's like saying that it's a crime to break the law.

A repetition of the claim that they're different. But as I understand it, to say that I am entitled to not be punched by you is just to say that it is...

You're just repeating that there's a difference, not explaining what that difference is. To me, there's no difference in saying that it is wrong to re...

So you're not entitled to freedom of expression but it's wrong for me to restrict your freedom? Again, I fail to see the difference.

What's the difference between saying that it is morally (or legally) impermissible for me to restrict your freedom of expression and saying that you h...

So a religious (or nonreligious) person doesn't have the right to freedom of expression? And a foetus doesn't have the right to live?

It has nothing to do with believing that p v q is a justified inference from p, so I don't understand why you're bringing it up. Gettier is simply say...

What do you mean by saying that Superman exists but isn't real?

In terms of the logic, nothing. In terms of our intuition regarding what counts as knowledge, everything. It shows that the JTB definition of knowledg...

I don't understand your distinction. If p is true then doesn't p v q correspond to fact/reality? Surely the statement "London is the capital city of E...

Try missionary.

You believe that p v q is true if you believe that one or both of the operands is true.

He doesn't need to believe anything about Brown's location. He only needs to believe that Jones owns a Ford. That's just a fact about disjunctions. Ag...

r is just a placeholder, like p and q. It's the justified true belief definition of knowledge. In this case, r is p ? q, which is shown to be a justif...

The example in the article was of a pastor, on the attack on the gay nightclub in Florida, saying "the tragedy is that more of them didn’t die. The tr...

That's not how it works. When a post is posted there would have been a random chance that ModBot would be activated, check the contents of that post f...

I'll spell it out more clearly for you. 1. My belief that p is justified 2. From 1, my belief that p ? q is justified 3. p is false and q is true 4. F...

No it doesn't. It only requires that you believe that Jones owns a Ford. That's the whole point. Given that "Either Jones owns a Ford or Smith is in B...

Actually, if you look at a truth-table for three-valued logic then a conjunction of a false statement ("all statements but this statement are false") ...

Then promote me from mod to admin. That'll show Hanover.

Sure. My point is just that the scientist doesn't need to prove that the theist is wrong. He just needs to ask for reasons to accept the assertion, an...

The scientist doesn't need to directly observe the thing conjectured (e.g. the Big Bang). They just need to be able to observe the expected effects. W...

But that's a claim that needs to be justified. If I claim that my dog barking is evidence that it will rain tomorrow then I need to justify this claim...

That's the claim that needs evidence.

Except "here's a universe, therefore there's a God" isn't valid. There's a missing premise, e.g. "if there's a universe then there's a God". But then ...

Proving a negative is almost always impossible to do. Scientists aren't in the business of proving that God doesn't exist. Rather they prove (or if "p...

He was responding to the message that was sent to TGW: I provided it here to better explain the situation, as they didn't seem to understand your expl...

University alumnus, actually.

Report them and I'll delete them. They're low post quality.

I don't understand how this addresses my post. For one, "the man" doesn't appear at all in my writing.

I'm not sure what those percentages have to do with the Gettier case. As I explained above, it has nothing to do with what you believe about Brown's l...

Consider these: 1. London is the capital city of England 2. Either London is the capital city of England or I am in London 3. Either London is the cap...

At least he's made it obvious that the unwritten rules need to be written. It's like the financial crisis making it clear that banks need special safe...

True, but I think that the Gettier example assumes that the person is rational. Smith believes f, Smith recognises that g, h, and i follow from f, and...