I’m not really sure about the history. A quick search turns up Russell making similar arguments at the turn of the century, but I doubt there was the sort of boom there was after Gettier—maybe because probability wasn’t developed enough to serve as an alternative ontology.
“Classic flavor” JTB is indeed that bad. JTB shifted to a probabilistic ontology is either Bayesian, wrong, or answering a different question altogether.
I’ll go for answering different questions. Bayes, although well known to mainstream academia , isn’t regarded as the one epistemology to rule them all , precisely because there are so many issues it doesn’t address.
I’m not really sure about the history. A quick search turns up Russell making similar arguments at the turn of the century, but I doubt there was the sort of boom there was after Gettier—maybe because probability wasn’t developed enough to serve as an alternative ontology.
It remains the case that JTB isn’t that bad, and Bayes isn’t that good a substitute.
“Classic flavor” JTB is indeed that bad. JTB shifted to a probabilistic ontology is either Bayesian, wrong, or answering a different question altogether.
I’ll go for answering different questions. Bayes, although well known to mainstream academia , isn’t regarded as the one epistemology to rule them all , precisely because there are so many issues it doesn’t address.