The big idea: What does it take to know something, rather than just believe it or guess right?
A recipe, then a break: For over two thousand years philosophers had a neat answer — a recipe with three ingredients. Then, in a three-page paper, one philosopher showed the recipe was broken.
Knowledge = justified true belief (JTB): The classic definition says you know something when three things line up. Belief: you believe it. Truth: it really is true. Justification: you have solid grounds, not a lucky guess. Miss any one and it's not knowledge — a lucky right guess fails 'justification'; a well-reasoned false belief fails 'truth'.
Free preview
This is the free notes preview
You're reading the free notes. Aimnova Pro unlocks the full study experience — and you can try it with your first topic free to keep:
- FlashcardsLock in vocabulary and key terms with spaced repetition.
- Practice questionsAnswer exam-style questions and get instant AI marking.
- Mock exams & past-paper vaultSit full mocks and see exactly how examiners award marks.
- Personalised study planA daily plan built around your exam date and weak areas.
Start Studying Free Full access to Aimnova Pro · cancel anytime
In 1963 Edmund Gettier asked a deadly question: what if all three ingredients are there, but you're only right by luck?
The stopped clock: You glance at the big station clock and it reads 3:00.
All three ingredients are there
1
Belief
You believe it's 3:00.
2
Justification
You have good justification — that clock is usually spot-on.
3
Truth
And it really is 3:00, so your belief is true.
Believe · Justified · True
The twist: But the clock stopped exactly 12 hours ago and has been frozen at 3:00 the whole time. You just happened to look at the one moment in the day when a stopped clock is right. Your belief is true — but only by pure luck.
So JTB isn't enough: Did you really know the time? Almost everyone says no. Yet it's a justified true belief. So JTB isn't enough for knowledge.
Checkpoint — the problem: In one line: you can hit the truth by luck while your reasons point elsewhere — so justified true belief can fall short of knowledge. This is the 'Gettier problem'.
Practice with exam-style questions
Answer exam-style questions and get AI feedback that shows you exactly what examiners want to see in a full-marks response.
Try Practice FreeYour first topic is free to keep • No credit card required
Gettier didn't offer a fix — he just broke the recipe. Since 1963 philosophers have hunted for the missing fourth ingredient.
"Add: no luck"
- Knowledge = JTB plus getting the truth non-accidentally
- The clock case fails because the truth was pure luck
- Feels right — but 'luck' is slippery to define exactly
"Add: reliable reasons"
- Your reason must be a reliable guide to the truth here
- A stopped clock isn't a reliable guide, so it fails
- But how reliable is reliable enough? Hard to pin down
Go further — higher-level insight: Notice the deeper worry. Every proposed fourth ingredient (‘no luck’, ‘reliable method’, ‘couldn't easily have been wrong’) faces a new cleverer Gettier-style case that slips past it. After sixty years there's still no agreed patch. So some philosophers conclude knowledge simply can't be captured by a tidy list of ingredients at all — that's a strong top-band point.
Checkpoint — the hunt: In one line: the missing ingredient is roughly 'you weren't just lucky' — but no one has pinned down exactly what that means. The search itself is the lasting lesson.