Gettier Cases without False Lemmas?

@article{Levin2006GettierCW,
  title={Gettier Cases without False Lemmas?},
  author={Michael E. Levin},
  journal={Erkenntnis},
  year={2006},
  volume={64},
  pages={381-392}
}
  • M. Levin
  • Published 5 July 2006
  • Philosophy
  • Erkenntnis
Examples cited by Feldman, Lehrer and others of true beliefs that are justified, but not by false lemmas, turn out under scrutiny to involve false lemmas after all. In each case there is an EG inference whose conclusion is unwarranted unless its base instance is false. A shift to non-deductive justification does not avert the difficulty. The relation of this result to non-inferential Gettier cases is suggested. 
KEEPING TRACK OF THE GETTIER PROBLEM
This paper argues that for someone to know proposition p inferen- tially it is not enough that his belief in p and his justification for believing p covary with the truth of p through a sphere of
Knowledge from Falsehood and Truth-Closeness
The paper makes two points. First, any theory of knowledge must explain the difference between cases of knowledge from falsehood (provided there are any) and Gettier cases where the subject relies on
Gettier and the Problem of Induction by Ean
Introduction Fifty-four years have passed since Edmund Gettier’s short treatise undercut philosophers’ complacent confidence in the justified true belief (JTB) definition of knowledge. Subsequent
Causal tracking reliabilism and the Gettier problem
This paper argues that reliabilism can handle Gettier cases once it restricts knowledge producing reliable processes to those that involve a suitable causal link between the subject’s belief and the
Christopher Steinsvold Some Formal Semantics for Epistemic Modesty
Given the frequency of human error, it seems rational to believe that some of our own rational beliefs are false. This is the axiom of epistemic modesty. Unfortunately, using standard propositional
Some Formal Semantics for Epistemic Modesty
TLDR
Two alternative semantics for KD45 and the axiom of epistemic modesty are explored, one of which uses the usual relational semantics and bisimulation quantifiers and the other uses a topological semantics and standard propositional quantification.
Risk Sensitive Credit
Credit theorists claim to explain the incompatibility of luck and knowledge and also what makes knowledge valuable. If the theory works as well as they think, it accomplishes a lot. Unsurprisingly,
Perceiving as knowing in the predictive mind
On an ‘internalist’ picture, knowledge isn’t necessary for understanding the nature of perception and perceptual experience. This contrasts with the ‘knowledge first’ picture, according to which it’s