Zagzebski

Question 1

Which of these is closest to Zagzebski’s way of creating a Gettier case for an analysis of knowledge as true belief plus further conditions X?

Answer 1

Describe a situation where someone meets condition X but has the bad luck to believe a falsehood; then add a stroke of luck that makes their belief true after all.

Question 2

Which ways of analyzing knowledge does Zagzebski think will be forever vulnerable to Gettier cases?

Answer 2

All analyses of knowledge as true belief plus some further conditions X, such that beliefs can meet conditions X without being true.

Question 3

Does Zagzebski think that epistemologists should define justification/warrant so that you can never be fully justified/warranted in believing a falsehood?

Answer 3

No, she does not.