You're listening to the partially examined life a podcast by some guys who at one point

said on doing philosophy for a living but then thought better of it.

Our question for episode 348 is something like, what is philosophy's task in analyzing

knowledge?

We read some articles by Timothy Williamson. Knowledge First Epitomology, which was published as a chapter in the Rutledge Companion to Epistemology in 2010,

Justifications, excuses, and skeptical scenarios from 2015 and morally loaded cases in philosophy in 2019.

For more information about these articles and the podcast, please see Partially Examine Life.com.

This is Mark Linton Meyer with crystal clear compliance conditions in Madison,

Wisconsin.

This is Wesall I justified in believing I ought to do something without being justified in actually doing it in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

This is Christopher Heath.

I am unjustified but also blameless in Hollywood, California. And this is Russell Ming, intellectually isolated in Bakersfield, California.

All right, so we recently had an episode on the justified true belief, the Gettyer cases,

and one of the things that came out of that was, well, explicitly in this Zebzebsky article,

the idea that actually you can't improve the

definition of knowledge as justified true belief by beefing up justification or

adding in an extra thing that it's actually a hopeless task.

And so the natural response to that, which I think some of us voiced

even during the discussion was maybe this was a fruitless project in the first place

and we shouldn't expect to be able to analyze knowledge in this way.

And then we just covered the Indian Nia School,

which actually has this knowledge first approach,

...