- published: 26 Feb 2016
- views: 18090
The Gettier problem is a philosophical question about whether a piece of information that happens to be true but that someone believes for invalid reasons, such as a faulty premise, counts as knowledge. It is named after American philosopher Edmund Gettier, who wrote about the problem in a three-page paper published in 1963, called "Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?". The paper refers to the concept of knowledge as justified true belief (JTB), credited to Plato, though Plato argued against this very account of knowledge in the Theaetetus (210a). In the paper, Gettier proposed two scenarios where the three criteria (justification, truth, and belief) seemed to be met, but where the majority of readers would not have felt that the result was knowledge due to the element of luck involved.
The term is sometimes used to cover any one of a category of thought experiments in contemporary epistemology that seem to repudiate a definition of knowledge as justified true belief.
The responses to Gettier's paper have been numerous. While some rejected Gettier's examples, many sought to adjust the JTB account of knowledge to lessen the impact of both Gettier's own problems and other problems (collectively titled "Gettier problems") created in their mould. Since 1963, experiments have also been conducted to determine whether the instinctive reactions of those presented with a Gettier problem are uniform or display language or genetic biases.
Is knowledge the same as justified true belief? In this Wireless Philosophy video, Jennifer Nagel (University of Toronto) discusses a Gettier case, a scenario in which someone has justified true belief but not knowledge. We’ll look at a Gettier case from Edmund Gettier’s famous 1963 paper on this topic, and a structurally similar case from 8th century Classical Indian philosophy. Subscribe! http://bit.ly/1vz5fK9 More on Jennifer Nagel: http://bit.ly/1PLgDZZ ---- Wi-Phi @ YouTube: http://bit.ly/1PX0hLu Wi-Phi @ Khan Academy: http://bit.ly/1nQJcF7 Twitter: https://twitter.com/wirelessphi Facebook: http://on.fb.me/1XC2tx3 Instagram: @wiphiofficial ---- Help us caption & translate this video! http://amara.org/v/HvQ0/
This video presents and explains several versions of the Gettier problem. Furthermore, it explains the failure of one popular response (the "no false belief/grounds" response) to solve the problem. Other responses and their shortcomings are covered in the sequel to this video. Enjoy.
A brief description of the Gettier Problem (the claim that justified true belief is insufficient for knowledge) and one of the thought experiments involved.
Week two of the University of Edinburgh's "Introduction to Philosophy" (INTROPHIL) open online course. Professor Duncan Pritchard School of Philosophy, Psychology and Language Sciences University of Edinburgh Licence: CC-BY-NC http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/
A series of lectures delivered by Peter Millican to first-year philosophy students at the University of Oxford. The lectures comprise the 8-week General Philosophy course and were delivered in late 2009.
How do we define knowledge? And how was a definition of knowledge that had lasted for 2000 years successfully challenged? Watch Macat's short video for a great introduction to Edmund Gettier's Is Justified True Belief Knowledge? Is one of the most important philosophy papers ever written. Subscribe for weekly videos that are your guide to the world's greatest ideas. Macat's Analyses are definitive studies of the most important books and papers in 14 humanities and social sciences subjects. A powerful resource for students, teachers and lifelong learners everywhere, our analyses do much more than just summarize seminal texts. Using Macat’s videos, audiobooks, and mind maps you can explore and apply the world’s greatest ideas everyday. Proven by the University of Cambridge to improve crit...
My attempt at making a philosophy video in 1 minute, explaining the Gettier problem that supposedly disproves (Plato's) account of knowledge as true justified belief. I neither support nor condemn the theories explained in this series - I simply present them as quickly and to-the-point as I can. Feel free to comment with your own opinion/argument/counterargument! This video screencast was created with Doceri on an iPad. Doceri is free in the iTunes app store. Learn more at http://www.doceri.com
An explanation of the "No False Lemmas" response to the Gettier Problem and a demonstration that the problem will reassert itself via the Barn Facade thought experiment.
In this second lecture on the Gettier problem, I canvass four popular attempts to define "knowledge." We begin with the "conclusive reasons" account and the alternative "contextualist" account offered by Fred Dretske. And we also cover the course of the development of Alvin Goldman's "reliabilism." Lastly, Gilbert Harman's "defeasibility" account of knowledge is presented and explained in detail.
In this video we explain the traditional view of knowledge given by Plato and the problems raised for it by 20th century philosopher Edmund Gettier. We are always looking for ways to improve the quality of our videos, so if you have any suggestions please do not hesitate to tell us! You can follow us on our Twitter and Facebook feeds here: Twitter - https://twitter.com/TotalPhilosophy Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/TotalPhilosophy Music used: Hand Trolley - Kevin Macleod -Evil Demon justifiably and truly removed, we believe
Gettier problem The Gettier problem is a philosophical question about whether a piece of information that happens to be true but that someone believes for invalid reasons, such as a faulty premise, counts as knowledge.It is named after American philosopher Edmund Gettier, who wrote about the problem in a three-page paper published in 1963, called "Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?". -Video is targeted to blind users Attribution: Article text available under CC-BY-SA image source in video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4ujte2EwJ0
دقيقة كلام فلسفة أشكالية جيتر Gettier Problem "لكن الاطار العام لنظرية المعرفة كان مقبول كوسيلة لتعريف المعرفة لمدة 2500 سنة، لكن فى الوقت الحالى معظم الفلاسفة بيعتقدوا فى عدم صحة التعريف ده.. ياترى ايه السبب؟ السبب بيرجع للفيلسوف الامريكى ايدموند جيتتر اللى نشرسنة 1963 ورقة بحثية بعنوان "هل الأعتقاد الصحيح المبرر معرفة؟Is Justified True Belief Knowledge? جيتتر أعتقد ان من الضرورى لاى أعتقاد ان يكون صحيح ومبرر علشان يصبح مؤهل لانه يكون معرفة .. لكن الشروط دى بس مش كفاية !.. تخيل ان أحمد ومحمود رايحين يقدموا على وظيفة فى شركة ما، خلينا نفرض ان محمود فى حوار سريع مع احمد اكتشف انه قريب موظف مهم فى الشركة وانه عندة 10 سنين خبرة، محمود كون أعتقاد ان اى حد عنده 10 سنين خبرة اكيد هياخد الشغل ده خصوصا وان خبرتة 8 سنين بس ضيف علي كده ان اعلان الشركة بيطلب خبرة 10 سنين.. يبقى دلوقتى محمود عنده ...
Our website: https://goo.gl/B1GmVw?20521
Part 5.3. The difference between internalist and externalist accounts of knowledge; whether we need external factors to justify knowledge or whether internal accounts are sufficient, and the Gettier cases. Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-Share Alike 2.0 UK: England & Wales; http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/uk/
How do we know what we know? Turns out the greatest minds in philosophy weren’t really sure. One guy who went to school with the Allen brothers’ Dad may have pulled a fast one on Plato and laughed all the way to the bank. Or did he? Find out how elephants, Bruce Lee, Doctor Who, and Donald Rumsfeld help us understand what we know we may know. Maybe. But there was a cow. We can be sure of that. Perhaps. Subscribe in iTunes here: http://apple.co/1TjPgag Subscribe via RSS here: http://youvegotitallwrong.libsyn.com/rss Visit us at: www.youvegotitallwrong.net Email us at: feedback@youvegotitallwrong.net Follow us on Twitter here: https://twitter.com/AllWrongPodcast
Damon will sell 220 homes this year earning $1.3 million GCI with a team of 11 people. He spends $20,000 a month on marketing to generate about 400 buyer leads and 50 solid seller leads. Here’s the best part – he hired and then FIRED us about a year ago. He purchased a $4,000 camera and a bunch of other expensive video equipment to do it on his own. It was too much work, so he hired us back to stick with the simple HD webcam interviews. The results have been phenomenal. “It’s only been since hiring Vyral Marketing I’m now getting business from my database,” says Damon. Damon sends two educational Q&A; videos a month to his database of both past clients and warm leads he’s nurturing into business. He also sends coaching videos out to local agents to recruit talent. We’re also going to di...
Un projecte del CREAL
Sergei Artemov, “Constructive knowledge” Logic Colloquium 2015, Helsinki http://www.helsinki.fi/lc2015/materials/slides_artemov.pdf The constructive approach considers a proposition true only when there is a conclusive proof of it. This leads to the Brouwer-Heyting-Kolmogorov semantics and a variety of intuitionistic logic systems. Likewise, constructive knowledge is viewed as a result of verification, not necessarily producing an explicit proof of what has been verified. Since conclusive proofs can serve as verifications, constructive truth, under the natural assumptions that the corresponding conclusive proof is available and recognized as such, yields constructive knowledge. Within the framework of intuitionistic logic augmented by the “knowledge modality” K this can be formulated as t...
In this episode we explore the roles of domestic animal husbandry and glass blowing in the rise of Enlightenment astronomical theories. Mark decides to derail the show with an historic Who’s Who pop-quiz of Hellenic science before we get to the work of philosopher Thomas Kuhn via his relationship with Edmund Gettier (see a previous episode) and Errol Morris. Pro tips: Philosophers who were also physicists know how to throw projectiles, the Bible included instructions on the scientific method, the Earth has always been round*, and Paco definitely wasn’t cosplaying that one time. *NB: Oblate Spheroid Subscribe in iTunes here: http://apple.co/1TjPgag Subscribe via RSS here: http://youvegotitallwrong.libsyn.com/rss Visit us at: www.youvegotitallwrong.net Email us at: feedback@youvegotitallwr...
أيه هى طبيعة الحقيقة؟ .. من الراجح ان الحقيقة هى نتاج التفكير المنطقى السليم، هى هدف البحث العلمى، والدراسة التاريخية، والتدقيق فى العمل. احنا بنفهم المقصود بالجملة عن طريق فهم الشروط اللى تحت تأثيرها اللى بتعبر عنه الجملة بيكون صحيح. لكن البحث فى طبيعة الحقيقة بيتجاوز حدود التبسيط ده لجوهر الحقيقة نفسها! الأشكالية الاساسية والمحورية فى الفلسفة بشكل عام وفلسفة ماوراء الطبيعة بشكل خاص، هى ايه هو جوهر حقيقة الاشياء؟ هل الحقيقة خاصية للكائنات اللغوية زى الجمل ؟ ولا هل الحقيقة خاصية للفرضيات (كائنات غيرلغوية، مجردة، بدون بعد زمانى)؟ .. السؤال الجوهرى هو .. ايه هى الحقيقة؟ .. ايه هو المقصود لما بنقول ان ادعاء ما حقيقى؟ فلاسفة ماوراء الطبيعة صاغوا مجموعة من النظريات اللى بتحاول تشرح طبيعة الحقيقة من عدة زوايا ومناظير مختلفة. الهدف كان ومازل هو تقديم نظرية عملية قابلة للتطبيق والاستيعاب لتفسير ...