Describe the Traditional Account of Knowledge. That is, explain what the Traditional Account’s analysis of knowledge is (what conditions it specifies and necessary and jointly sufficient) and why it seems intuitively correct. Now explain what Gettier’s attack on this Account amounts to. Lay out one of Gettier’s counterexamples and show how it attacks the Account. Be sure to include, and explain, the two extra principles on which he relies to make the counterexample work.
Tradition knowledge account is the is the epistemology that
tries to explain, or rather distinguish knowledge from mere truth or a lucky guess.
It argues that knowledge is based on
certain rigid justification that in turn concludes that knowledge is nothing
other than justified truth.
Gerttier showed the compromised this by trying to show that
there are cases in justified true belief that are clearly not cases of
knowledge. He showed that this traditional analysis is defective.
He also posted several other requirements of knowledge when
philosophers urged that he failed to show how defective the account was. There should
be a connection between a belief and a fact.