Clarifying the Concepts of Knowledge Continued

[Amity]

@Sam26

When I claim that justification is concerned with whether a belief is connected to truth in the right way, I’m not saying that there’s only one method or one philosophical procedure. I simply mean that not every connection between belief and truth is enough for knowledge claims.

Yes, I understand that there is not only one method or theory in epistemology. It’s a complicated network:
Epistemology - Wikipedia

I found this outline helpful. An overview of core topics with links to e.g. types and features of justification, belief, truth (helpful for beginners):

Outline of epistemology - Wikipedia

It shows separate branches of knowledge with a wide scope and spectrum of intersecting themes.

You can scroll down and click on topics like ‘Truth’ and ‘Justification’. A fairly easy, informative read which can be taken slowly and carefully.

An established philosophy site can require more effort e.g. Understanding (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

@Sam26

Of course many of these concepts are problematic, which is precisely why they need clarification, especially in epistemology. So, I think you’re overstating the problem.

Yes, the complexity of the subject is clear. However, I am not certain that a forum discussion, like this, would eliminate the inherent and interesting problems.

It is simply another theory which seems to be included in your book. See post 40/65 in Clarifying the Concepts of Knowledge - Metaphysics & Epistemology - The Philosophy Forum

I don’t wish to get into the complications of your argument. It is supposed to be a clarification of the concepts of knowledge. I will leave it here, for now.