The Gettier problem challenges the traditional definition of knowledge as 'justified true belief.' Edmund Gettier showed cases where someone believes something true with justification—yet we'd hesitate to call it knowledge because luck was involved. If you believe there's a sheep in a field, you're justified by seeing a sheep-shaped rock, and there happens to be an unseen sheep behind it—you have justified true belief but not knowledge, many argue.
Based on the passage, it can be inferred that
justified true belief is sufficient for knowledge in all cases
our concept of knowledge may include requirements beyond having true beliefs with good reasons
luck is irrelevant to whether someone knows something
the Gettier problem proves knowledge is impossible
Correct Answer: B
Choice B is the best answer. The Gettier case has justified true belief but lacks knowledge.
- Context clues: Three conditions met, but "we'd hesitate to call it knowledge because luck was involved."
- Meaning: Something additional beyond justified true belief is needed for knowledge.
- Verify: The intuition that these aren't knowledge cases points to missing requirements.
💡 Strategy: When standard conditions are met but the concept doesn't apply, infer additional requirements.
Choice A is incorrect because the Gettier cases show it's not sufficient. Choice C is incorrect because luck is precisely why we withhold the label 'knowledge.' Choice D is incorrect because the problem only shows the definition is incomplete.