Hey Anti-Theists! Prove Your Claim

[Neo-Scholastic]

Rae, the idea behind knowledge as "justified true belief" distinguishes between deduced concepts, of which someone can be certain, and empirical judgments, of which someone cannot be fully certain. Your examples seem to lean toward the more empirical, primarily because they address specific instances. That approach gives you a justified opinion, but not actual knowledge. I think you recognize this, because you set aside from the 'true' part in your post.

I think you're mistaken. Gettier problems, the standard litmus of the justified-true-belief definition, deal with empirical truths. Knowledge doesn't only apply to a priori truths.

I had to do a keyword search on "Gettier Problems" and trust that your interpretation is correct for current epistemology. I was referencing the ancient formula of doxa + logos = episteme. In the most broad sense 'logos' simply means an account; however some scholars interpret Plato's meaning of 'logos' more rigidly, i.e. a logically valid account following in the ancient Greek tradition of argument started by Thales.