Category Archives: Justified True Belief

Natural law, divine command and Euthyphro’s dilemma resolved

Posted on March 27, 2011 by

…using Hume’s is-ought distinction’s mirror concept, the ought-is distinction***. Euthyphro’s dilemma:  “Is the pious loved by the gods because it is pious?  Or is it pious because it is loved by the gods?”  This can be reworded to read “Is … Continue reading →

Posted in Divine Essentialism, Euthyphro Dilemma, Is-Ought Fallacy, Justified True Belief, Natural Law and Divine Command | Leave a comment

Hume’s is-ought, Plato’s true-justified, Euthyphro’s dilemma and Gettier’s problem

Posted on February 23, 2011 by

Hume‘s is-ought (fact-value) distinction is the same as Plato‘s true-justified distinction.  When is/true/fact and ought/justified/value are not kept distinct, the Euthyphro dilemma as applied to epistemology ensues:  Are we justified in believing (ought we believe) merely because our belief is true (can truth justify … Continue reading →

Posted in Apisticism, Divine Essentialism, Euthyphro Dilemma, Gettier Problem, Is-Ought Fallacy, Justified True Belief | Leave a comment

Answering Gettier

Posted on January 9, 2011 by

[ work in progress ] [ completed 1/15/11 ] Plato’s justified-true-belief definition of knowledge, maintained by critical realists, besides requiring that a belief be justified by evidence and true by correspondence, says 1) whether or not a belief is true … Continue reading →

Posted in Gettier Problem, Is-Ought Fallacy, Justified True Belief, Norris' Epistemology, Reviews and Interviews | 8 Comments

Norris, Gettier, Euthyphro, Hume and Plato: Is knowledge justified true belief?

Posted on January 5, 2011 by

[ Section on Gettier revised 1/7/11 ][ Mention of Euthyphro dilemma as applied to epistemology revised 2/23/11 ] When deciding whether knowledge is justified, true belief (Plato), a question arises: Is the truth of a belief 1) external to the … Continue reading →

Posted in Divine Essentialism, Euthyphro Dilemma, Gettier Problem, Is-Ought Fallacy, Justified True Belief, Norris' Epistemology, Reviews and Interviews | 3 Comments

Replacing Agnosticism with Apisticism

Posted on November 21, 2010 by

This article argues we replace the word “agnosticism” (lack of knowing) with the word “apisticism” (lack of believing) on every belief scale.  The current debate between Myers and Coyne on the falsifiability of atheism is complicated by a misunderstanding of faith/belief as … Continue reading →

Posted in Apisticism, Faith, Gettier Problem, Is-Ought Fallacy, Justified True Belief | Leave a comment

Is-ought fallacy and knowledge as justified, true belief

Posted on November 12, 2010 by

The is-ought fallacy (Hume) is a real fallacy, and is why knowledge is justified, true belief (Plato). In order to be knowledge, a belief must both be justified by the evidence, and true by correspondence. If we consider justified a belief … Continue reading →

Posted in Is-Ought Fallacy, Justified True Belief | Leave a comment