1. What can you remember?
Why did we say Justification is necessary for knowledge?
What did we say some of the issues with saying truth is necessary for knowledge are?
Why might some people argue that belief is not necessary for knowledge?

2. Lesson Objectives
Why do some people believe that JTB is not sufficient for knowledge?
What are Gettier Problems and what is the issue they are highlighting?

3. Issues With The Tripartite View
The problems we looked at last lesson suggested that one or more of the conditions was not necessary for knowledge. We also discussed some of the counter examples to this point. Edmund Gettier (1927-) created a series of examples which suggest that even if we have all three conditions, they are not sufficient for knowledge. These examples intend to show that we can have truth, belief and justification but not knowledge. He wrote these examples in a short paper entitled ‘Is Justified, True Belief knowledge?’ (1963) then hasn’t published anything since.
What did you find out for homework? Think / Pair / Share (Whiteboards)

4. Example 1: The Job Interview
Read through the first example as outlined by Gettier on page 21. Outline it briefly on your whiteboards (bullet point if you wish). Explain how the example meets each criterion of the tripartite view (Where is the justification? etc.) What problem is Gettier highlighting here? Any initial thoughts as to how it could be solved?

5. Example 1: The Job Interview
Smith and Jones are applying for the same job. Smith has excellent reason to believe that Jones will get the job, e.g. Smith has been told this by the employer. Smith also has excellent reason to believe that Jones has ten coins in his pocket, e.g. Smith has just counted them. Therefore, both of these beliefs are justified. Smith then puts the two beliefs together and deduces that the man who will get the job has ten coins in his pocket. This belief is justified, because it is inferred deductively from justified beliefs. Given what we have argued so far, we could therefore say that Smith knows the man who will get the job has 10 coins in his pocket.

6. Example 1: The Job Interview
It turns out that Jones doesn’t get the job, Smith does. It also happens that, unknown to him, Smith also has ten coins in his pocket. So Smith’s belief that the man who will get the job has ten coins in his pocket is true. But it no longer seems like knowledge. Why?
Smith was certainly justified (to some extent) for his belief. He had counted the coins in Jones’ pocket and been told by the president Jones would get the job.
Smith’s belief was true.
Smith had a belief that the man who would get the job had 10 coins in his pocket.

7. Example 2: The Car and The Trip
Read through the second example on page 21. Outline it briefly on your whiteboards (bullet point if you wish). Explain how the example meets each criterion of the tripartite view (Where is the justification? etc.) Any other thoughts as to how it could be solved?

8. Example 2: The Car and The Trip
This one involves Smith having plenty of evidence that his friend Jones owns a Ford car (imagine he has talked about it at length). On the basis of this he believes that a) Jones owns a ford. Smith has another friend Mr Brown. He has no evidence of Brown’s whereabouts at the moment, but on the strength of his first belief he is able to form a new disjunctive belief that c) Jones owns a ford or Brown is in Barcelona (Barcelona chosen at random). This belief is justified as Smith had no reason to doubt the first part.

9. Example 2: The Car and The Trip
However, unbeknownst to Smith, Jones no longer owns the car, he wrote it off and has been driving a rental all week. Also unbeknownst to Smith, Brown really is in Barcelona. So his belief that c) Jones owns a ford or Brown is in Barcelona is true! Would we want to say this is knowledge? If so, why? If not, why not?
Smith was certainly justified for his belief. He had heard Jones talking extensively about the car all week.
Smith’s belief was true, Jones did not own a ford and Brown was in Barcelona.
Smith had a belief that either Jones owned a Ford or Brown was in Barcelona.

10. Summary Tasks
Add a bullet point summary of the two examples to your notes. Include why each seems to meet the criteria of the Tripartite View.
Read through the examples given on page 22 and answer the questions on page 23 (whiteboards).
Can you think of any responses to these problems? What might we need to add to the Tripartite view to ensure we have knowledge?
Extension: What is the difference between Gettier problems and “fake-barn” style cases (bottom of page 23)?
Extension 2: Why are each of the JTB conditions considered to be necessary for knowledge? (recap of last lesson)

11. Fake-Barn Style Problem
A man, Tim, is driving, unknowingly, through a place locally called fake-barn country. This is because, by the side of the road, there are many fake barns consisting of just a barn front with nothing behind used for movie sets etc.
The driver does not pay much attention, but then looks to the side and sees a big red barn. On the basis of this, he states to himself “I know there is a big red barn there”. It so happens he is actually seeing a real barn, the only one in the neighbourhood.
Can you identify the JTB points here?
How does this differ from the Gettier problems we outlined earlier?

12. Example 3: Fake Barn
This example differs from the standard Gettier problems because in the standard cases it is a false belief or assumption that turns out to be luckily true causing the issue (i.e. the false belief that Jones will get the job or that he owns a ford). In the fake barn example there is no false belief, the barn Tim is seeing really is a barn. The issue here is the wider context (he’s in fake barn country) makes his belief seem less than knowledge.

13. Gettier Vs The Barn
Gettier Counterexamples – These involve a belief about something / someone luckily being true about something / someone else. Fake Barn Examples – The belief is correct about the subject, but the believer does not know that they are in an unusual context which makes her belief seem luckily true.

14. Summary Tasks
Add a bullet point summary of the two examples to your notes. Include why each seems to meet the criteria of the Tripartite View.
Read through the examples given on page 22 and answer the questions on page 23 (whiteboards).
Can you think of any responses to these problems? What might we need to add to the Tripartite view to ensure we have knowledge?
Extension: What is the difference between Gettier problems and “fake-barn” style cases (bottom of page 23)?
Extension 2: Why are each of the JTB conditions considered to be necessary for knowledge? (recap of last lesson)

15. Possible Responses? Responses
Could we perhaps add another concept to the tripartite view in order to form a better theory of knowledge?
Responses

16. Lesson Objectives / Summary
Why do some people believe that JTB is not sufficient for knowledge?
What are Gettier Problems and what is the issue they are highlighting?