ABSTRACT

Defeasibility theorists might well deny both teachers and students knowledge in the cases. The basic idea behind defeasibility accounts of knowledge is that sometimes justified true belief is not knowledge, because the justification is importantly incomplete. A defeasibility theorist would claim that the problem in a Gettier case is that an undercover fact exists. Different defeasibility theorists then differ over how to analyze this “should.” Imagine being on a jury that convicts someone on the basis of evidence that clearly points to his guilt. Imagine, too, that there are facts of which students and the other jurors are ignorant and which, had they been aware of them, would have lessened the impact of the incriminating evidence. Students have been sedated, kidnapped, transported to Rajasthan, and deposited in a chair just like the one in which they were sitting in Australia.