Explain the true-justified-belief theory of knowledge - Essay Example

For example, if person X sees person Y seating alone at a table in a restaurant and guesses that he is waiting for his wife, while he could be waiting for anyone else from a business partner to a relative or an old friend, he could also be just having a meal by himself. If this proposition is based on a wild guess, even if person Y does turn out to be waiting for his wife given that she arrives a while later, this does not amount to knowledge on the part of person X. When what appears to be knowledge lacks truth, it cannot be considered to be knowledge.

It therefore holds that knowledge as a minimum is true belief (Audi n.p.) This further raises the question of whether knowing something means “justifiedly” believing it (Audi n.p.). As in the case above, simply guessing that person Y is waiting for his wife, even in the event that it turns out to be true does not constitute knowledge on the part of person X. This is because there is no justification for it. However, assuming that person Z tells person X that he has seen person Y wait for his wife at that restaurant at the same time every day for a period of time, this could justify person X’s true belief that indeed person Y is waiting for his wife.

Person X’s acquisition of knowledge that person Y is waiting for his wife can be rationalized by his acquisition of evidence that justifies the true belief that he indeed is (Audi n.p.). Additionally, Audi contends that the more evidence people acquire to support their belief in something and build up their justification of the particular belief, the nearer they get to knowledge (n.p.). This backs the view that justified belief is a facet of knowledge. From the above, Audi states that it can be deduced that there is a practical and considerable condition necessary for knowledge, that is based on three elements; one knows something only if one believes in it, it is true and the belief that one has of that particular thing is justifiable.

In particular; as a minimum, knowledge is justified true belief (Audi n.p.). This sums up the theory of true-justified-belief of knowledge. However, there are sufficient conditions provided for in the analysis of what constitutes knowledge. This is because, despite the fact that I only know something, if I truly and “justifiedly” believe in it, it does not hold that, if I truly and “justifiedly” believe in something, then I know it (Audi n.p.). This three-way analysis of knowledge according to O’Brien infers that the three conditions are necessary for knowledge, that is; belief, truth and justification (11).

The conditions are also jointly sufficient for knowledge meaning that one has knowledge when the three conditions are met. Necessary and sufficient conditions are connected to conditional statements conveying the truth of two suggestions in the form “If X then Y” (Lacewing 24). The assertion in this case is that if proposition X is true then proposition Y is also true. In the event that the assertion is true, it follows that proposition X is true, then proposition Y is true. It also follows that if proposition Y is false then proposition X is also false.

The theory of true-justified-belief of knowledge therefore holds that when the three conditions it proposes are met, together they are sufficient and nothing else is needed for knowledge (Lacewing 24). However, it also contends that if you know X then you have a justified true be