I think I've done quite a bit more than that. It will take while to sink in though. Paradigm shift is long overdue. Delusions of grandeur... I'm gonna...
About the methodological approach... Logic cannot account for truth(as correspondence to fact/reality). Rather, it presupposes it by virtue of assumin...
Which more closely represents modus ponens when the ground is spoken aloud? Ground is important no? What is a justified true belief if not a well-grou...
p1.Jones owns a Ford. p2."Either Jones owns a Ford, or Brown is in Boston" follows from Jones owns a Ford. p2."Either Jones owns a Ford, or Brown is i...
Something interesting happens when we remove the bits about justification and Gettier's commentary regarding the rules. Those are nothing more than di...
It's what we're not told that matters, because that's what's missing, and that's the problem. Gettier says nothing at all about Smith deducing that (p...
I'm actually quite aware of that. However, the focus is squarely upon the necessary and sufficient conditions for believing a disjunction. So, it's no...
We should be perhaps even more surprised if he was asked which of the following was a more accurate rendition/account/representation of his believing ...
I would readily agree that not all Gettier problems involve disjunction. They do all involve his formula though, and it has been proven to be inadequa...
p1. (if (p) is true then ((p v q) is true)) p2. ((p) is true) C. ((p v q) is true because ((p) is true) and (if (p) is true then ((p or q) is true)). ...
Salva veritate Belief that:((p v q) is true because ((p) is true) and (if (p) is true then ((p v q) is true)) is not equivalent to belief that:((p v q...
Smith's considering the truth conditions of his particular disjunctions and subsequently concluding that the disjunction is true because those conditi...
What's missing is an adequate account of believing a disjunction. Belief that:((p v q) is true if (p) is true) is necessary but insufficient for belie...
The above marks a common point of conflation. The below marks a typical red herring response to the above... A careful reader will note that the objec...
"Belief that P" is an outline meant to be able to adequately represent any and all belief. "P" is a meaningless placeholder, and as such - if the form...
A nice small bit of context may serve us well. I strongly suggest that if one is offering a critique on the JTB concept of knowledge that s/he had bet...
This is to say that believing a disjunction has some sort of epistemic structure. You offered the following... 1. p 2. ~q 3. if (p and ~q) then (eithe...
Redundancy applies if there is no meaningful difference in the change being made. You're suggesting that Smith holds the belief that:((p v q) is true ...
The subjective/objective dichotomy adds nothing but confusion... Morality is understood as codes of conduct. As such they are all subject to individua...
I'm charging Gettier with inadequately accounting for Smith's thought/belief by virtue of not taking account of the process that is necessary for beli...
Well, I wouldn't put it like that. The quality of the definitions has no bearing upon the existence of the distinction. Knowledge cannot be adequately...
There's something to be said about Michael's earlier reply... Smith is claimed to believe a disjunction. The appropriate question for Smith is not "Do...
I'm charging Gettier with inadequately accounting for Smith's thought/belief by virtue of not taking account of the process that is necessary for beli...
The irony... This coming from one who's position rests upon knowingly and admittedly changing the meaning of Smith's belief... I believe that:Mary wil...
Michael wants to eliminate one part. Doing so renders an incomplete account of Smith's belief. This is clear for all to see. "Mary will pay me" does n...
The astute reader will note that Michael just conceded, perhaps unwittingly, that there are two parts of Smith's belief that:Mary will pay him because...
That doesn't follow from what I've been arguing. You'll have to do better than that Michael. What grounds this move to split up Smith's belief? On wha...
Smith believes Jones owns a Ford. Smith believes that Mary will give him £10 if Jones owns a Ford or if Brown is in Barcelona. Smith believes that Mar...
A bit of irony though... Gettier mistakenly claims to have satisfied the (JTB)necessary and sufficient conditions for knowing P, while failing miserab...
Fair enough, you're correct. Gettier himself says Smith does not know (h)... I was more or less going from the three formulations of S knows that P......
Gettier claims that Smith believes that "Either Jones owns a Ford or Brown is in Barcelona" is true. I'm objecting that this account of Smith's believ...
Seems that Gettier does as well as many many others including yourself. I mean, you say so immediately after saying that (p v q) is not an adequate re...
It strikes me that perhaps you've not seen this... I would concur. This is not always true. To be as precise as ordinary language allows:S must first ...
Understood and unsurprising given the novelty of my approach/position. Gettier claims to show a case that satisfies the JTB formulation of knowing a p...
Various attempts have been made in recent years to state necessary and sufficient conditions for someone's knowing a given proposition. Getting though...
I'm charging you with inadequately accounting for Smith's thought/belief by virtue of not taking account of the process that is necessary for believin...
Using (p v q) as a means to represent Smith's belief is problematic. The content of Smith's thought/belief is precisely what's in question. Smith's be...
Smith believes that he will receive payment because Jones owns a Ford. His belief is false. There's no word games being played Michael. I'm letting th...
Comments