The JTB (Justified True Belief) concept of knowledge:

S knows that p, if and only if:

(1) S believes that p.

(2) p is true.

(3) S is justified in believing that p.

© Dr. Mostofa N. Mansur

 Is this definition a good one?

 █ What makes a definition a good one?

 Two terms that concerns a definition:

(1) Definiendum: a word, phrase, or symbol that is the subject of

a definition, especially in a dictionary entry, or that is
introduced into a logical system by being defined. In other
words, a definiendum is the term that is to be defined.
© Dr. Mostofa N. Mansur

(2) Definiens: the word or words used to define or give an account

of the meaning of another word, as in a dictionary entry. In other
words, a definiens is a word or words that constitute a definition
of a term.
 Good Definition

■ In a good definition the definiens (the word/words that

are used to define the term to be defined) states all of the
necessary and sufficient conditions of the definiendum
(the term to be defined)
© Dr. Mostofa N. Mansur
 Necessary and Sufficient Conditions:

(1)Necessary Condition: a necessary condition for an event

is something without the presence of which (or, in the
absence of which) that event cannot occur.

That is, X is a necessary condition for Y means that:

if X is absent, then Y cannot occur;
© Dr. Mostofa N. Mansur

or, if X is false, then Y cannot be true;

or, if Y is true, then X must be true.

 Necessary and Sufficient Conditions:

(2) Sufficient Condition: a sufficient condition for Y is

something in the presence of which Y must occur.

That is, X is a sufficient condition for Y means that:

if X is present, then Y must occur

or, X is true, then Y is true

© Dr. Mostofa N. Mansur

or, if Y is false, then X is false

 Good Definition
[‘Too Broad’ and ‘Too Narrow’ Definitions]

■ Good Definition: if a definition (definiens) states exactly the

sufficient and necessary conditions (of the definiendum), then
that definitions is a good definition.

► If it sates less than the necessary and suffiicent conditions, then

© Dr. Mostofa N. Mansur

the definition is a ‘too broad’ definition.

► If it states more than the necessary and sufficient conditions,

then the definition is a ‘too narrow’ definition.
 Good Definition
[‘Too Broad’ and ‘Too Narrow’ Definitions]

● Example of a good definition:

S is a bachelor means that:
(1) S is an adult

(2) S is a male

(3) S is unmarried
© Dr. Mostofa N. Mansur

● (1), (2) and (3) together constitutes the sufficient condition for
“bachelor”. If (1), (2) and (3) are true of S, then S must be a
bachelor.
 Good Definition
[‘Too Broad’ and ‘Too Narrow’ Definitions]
 Is the following a good definition? Why or why not?
S is a bachelor means that:
(1) S is an adult
(2) S is unmarried
 Is the following a good definition? Why or why not?
S is a bachelor means that:
© Dr. Mostofa N. Mansur

(1) S is an adult
(2) S is a male

(3) S is unmarried

(4) S lives in Canada

 Good Definition

■ So, a good definition must include exactly the necessary and

sufficient conditions. In other words, in a good definition the
definiens must include all and only the necessary and
sufficient conditions of the definiendum. When we claim that
the definiens includes all the necessary and sufficient
conditions and only the necessary and sufficient conditions,
© Dr. Mostofa N. Mansur

we use the word “Iff”.

“Iff” means “if and only if”.

 Gettier Problem

█ Now return to the JTB concept of knowledge.

★ The main questions are:

(1) Does this definition (definiens) include all of the

necessary conditions of knowledge (defineindum)?

 The answer is “YES”.

© Dr. Mostofa N. Mansur

(2) Does this definition (definiens) include the sufficient

of knowledge (defineindum)?

 Gettier thinks the answer is “NO”.

 Gettier Problem

■ In order To show that the above definition

(JTB) does not provide the sufficient condition
of knowledge, Gettier needs to offer an
example in which all the conditions are
present, still that example does not provide an
© Dr. Mostofa N. Mansur

instance of genuine knowledge.

 Gettier’s counterexample to JTB

⇨ Smith and Jones applied for a job. Smith knows the

employer. To Smith the employer is a reliable source
to know who is getting the job. The employer tells
Smith that Jones is going to get the job. So, Smith
forms the following belief:
© Dr. Mostofa N. Mansur

(A) Jones will get the job.

 Gettier’s counterexample to JTB

⇨ Here, Smith is justified in forming that belief [namely the

belief (A)] as the employer is a reliable source for knowing
who will get the job. Now, Smith just counted the coins in
Jones’ pocket. He found that Jones has ten coins. So, he
forms the following belief:

(B) Jones is the man who has ten coins in his

© Dr. Mostofa N. Mansur

pocket.

⇨ Smith is justified in forming this belief [namely the belief

(b)] as he, himself, counted the coins in Jones’ pocket.
 Gettier’s counterexample to JTB

⇨ Now, from (A) and (B), Jones deduces the following

proposition:

(C) The man who will get the job has ten
coins in his pocket.

⇨ Here, Smith is justified in believing (C) as (C) follows

© Dr. Mostofa N. Mansur

from (A) and (B).

 Gettier’s counterexample to JTB
■ Now, suppose, unknown to Smith, it is not Jones but Smith who
will get the job. And, unknown to him, as matter of fact, he has
ten coins in his pocket. Now, the situation is like this:

(i) Smith believes that C

(ii) C is true
(iii) Smith is justified in believing that C

 According to Gettier, in the above case, although all the said

© Dr. Mostofa N. Mansur

conditions of knowledge is present, still Smith does not know

who will get the job; more precisely, Smith does not know that
C as in forming the belief in C Smith falsely believes that
Jones is the man who is getting the job.
 Gettier’s counterexample to JTB

■According to Gettier, in the above case, although all the said

conditions of knowledge is present, still Smith does not
know who will get the job; more precisely, Smith does not
know that C as in forming the belief in C Smith falsely
believes that Jones is the man who is getting the job.
© Dr. Mostofa N. Mansur
 Gettier’s counterexample to JTB

■ The phenomenon that the said conditions of knowledge is

present but the event of knowing has not occurred proves that
the conditions stated do not constitute the sufficient
condition for knowledge. Hence, the definition (JTB-
definition) of knowledge is not a good definition of the term.
© Dr. Mostofa N. Mansur

Thus, JTB must be rejected, according to Gettier.

 Bertrand Russell’s Counterexample to JTB

■ Consider that there is a very reliable clock that stands in the

town square. This morning you walk by it and look at the
clock and find that it is 9:55 am. You are now justified in
believing that it is 9:55 am as the clock is known as a very
reliable clock. But suppose that unknown to you, the clock has
stopped exactly 24 hours ago. Now, according to Russell, you
© Dr. Mostofa N. Mansur

have a justified true belief that it is 9:55 am, but you actually
do not know that this is the correct time.