Logos and episteme
John Ian K. BOONGALING
ABSTRACT: This paper identifies a structural feature of Gettier cases that has received little attention in the literature. In such cases, there is a decisive fact that explains why a subject’s justified true belief fails to constitute knowledge, yet that fact is inaccessible to the subject. By contrast, an evaluator who correctly judges that the subject lacks knowledge must have access to it. I argue that this asymmetry generates what I call the Evaluator’s Paradox: the epistemic position from which knowledge failure can be correctly diagnosed is precisely the position from which the belief cannot constitute knowledge.
