Why Gettier Cases Are Still Misleading: A Reply to Atkins

Logos and Episteme 8 (1):129-139 (2017)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
In this paper, I respond to Philip Atkins’ reply to my attempt to explain why Gettier cases (and Gettier-style cases) are misleading. I have argued that Gettier cases (and Gettier-style cases) are misdealing because the candidates for knowledge in such cases contain ambiguous designators. Atkins denies that Gettier’s original cases contain ambiguous designators and offers his intuition that the subjects in Gettier’s original cases do not know. I argue that his reply amounts to mere intuition mongering and I explain why Gettier cases, even Atkins’ revised version of Gettier’s Case I, still contain ambiguous designators.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
First archival date: 2017-03-21
Latest version: 2 (2017-03-28)
View upload history
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total downloads
76 ( #24,176 of 37,125 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
13 ( #22,787 of 37,125 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.