According to the standard interpretation of Gettier cases, they can be used to form significant challenges to the tradition of defining knowledge as justified true beliefs (hereafter “JTB”). This position naturally assumes that varieties of target beliefs involved in typical Gettier cases are all JTBs, namely, unified beliefs which are simultaneously justified and true. But I do not think this is true. Conversely, every target belief in typical Gettier cases should be cashed out as one or more beliefs, none of which is a genuine JTB. In short, there is no JTB in Gettier’s JTB-hostile vignettes at all. Hence, no matter whether the JTB account of knowledge is correct or not, Gettier cases are not really relevant to it. In addition, although I agree to Mizrahi’s (Logos Episteme 7(1):31–44, 2016) general observation that face-values of target beliefs cannot be taken for granted in all Gettier cases, I have made a further claim that there is no cross-board methodology to disambiguate the target beliefs in all Gettier cases.

中文翻译：

---

盖提案中没有正当的真实信念

根据Gettier案例的标准解释，它们可以用来对将知识定义为合理的真实信念（以下简称“ JTB”）的传统构成重大挑战。这个立场自然地假设典型的Gettier案例中涉及的目标信念的种类都是JTB，即统一的信念，这些信念同时被证明是正确的。但是我不认为这是真的。相反，在典型的Gettier案例中，每个目标信念都应作为一个或多个信念兑现，而这些信念都不是真正的JTB。简而言之，在Gettier的JTB敌对小插曲中根本没有JTB。因此，无论JTB知识帐户是否正确，Gettier案例都与它无关。此外，尽管我同意米兹拉希（Logos Episteme 7（1）：31–44，