Eye2theLongRun

It has long seemed to me that the oft cited definition of knowledge (and it harks back at least as far as Aristotle I think, and thus has pedigree) as “justified true belief” is a problem. The concepts of “truth” and “belief” do not sit happily in the same sentence. Even the most modest respect for logic would suggest that “belief” as an idea hinges crucially on the notion that in spite of a lack of evidence, “such and such” is nonetheless the case. Suggesting then that “truth” – a statement of what indeed is the case – can be justified on the basis of belief does involve some sort of mental flip which redefines belief itself. Surely it won’t do. Neither will provenance nor longevity make it so.