ABSTRACT
In short, knowledge is true belief through cognitive virtue. People can call this family of views 'robust virtue epistemology'. 'Robust' reflects the claim that virtuously formed true belief suffices for knowledge, and no other conditions are invoked to explain the nature and value of knowledge. Robust virtue epistemology enjoys several virtues. It posits an elegant, simple structure for knowledge. But even as a mere schema, robust virtue epistemology faces a dilemma. This chapter illustrates this dilemma with two putative counter examples, which appear to pull robust virtue epistemology in conflicting directions: attempts to rescue the view from one line of objection render the view more vulnerable to the other. Critics of robust virtue epistemology contend Morris's knowledge fails to satisfy the posited conditions: the true belief is not due to Morris's abilities, but rather it is due to the testifier's abilities.
