ABSTRACT
More generous approaches to knowledge fall under the category of fallibilism. This concept is most easily presented as a general thesis about the justification component of knowledge. Perhaps people should cultivate hard stares and jutting chins when thinking about knowledge and accept nothing less than 100 percent reliability. More generally, perhaps people should say that nothing less than the best will do for knowledge—and demand that, in order to be knowledge, a belief not only has to be true but also has to be perfectly justified. A more generous policy on attributing knowledge could be just as worrisome. Is it too hard for students to treat all claims to knowledge equally once people become generous in our approach? A given belief might appear to students to be knowledge, for example, only because people are not taking into account enough other beliefs—perhaps competing ones, along with their claims to being knowledge.
