Talk:Linda Zagzebski

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Linda Trinkaus Zagzebski. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110416021741/http://www.gf.org/fellows/16981-linda-trinkaus-zagzebski to http://www.gf.org/fellows/16981-linda-trinkaus-zagzebski
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090721034218/http://faculty-staff.ou.edu/Z/Linda.T.Zagzebski-1/ to http://faculty-staff.ou.edu/Z/Linda.T.Zagzebski-1/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:30, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Epistemology

The article has been expapnded with concerns to two primary sources:

• an academic paper published in 1994 which is one of the most original theoretical results of the subject matter. She demonstrates that any extension of the JTB can't avoid the Gettier problems or paradoxa: even if we add a fourth condition or change the last one of the Knowledge as justified true belief (JTB), then we can't have a reliable criterium to define what is knowledge and what is not;
• a book published in 1996 where she gave a new definition of knowledge and an Aristotelian-like definition of virtue.

There were also cited some secondary sources in which it is highlighted that for the first time in the history of modern gnoseology knowledge depends from the subject not solely in terms of a passive and static belief, but also in active and free acceptation to his call to realize his and his neighbour's happiness, while realizing the human essence and his singular one. Thus, virtue is dispisotion of the free will and ability of the person. The role of objective truth isn't denied, while it is put into brackets in the uncertainty of his metaphysical origin and in spite of the preminence of the epistemic subject. So far, she affirms knowledge is "a state of belief arising out of acts of intellettual virtue", without the word "truth" being pronounced (p. 171). But here it becomes preminent the subjective aspect of the true belief, which realizes human creatures in their natural tendence to the knowledge of truth. Nevertheless, this implies that what is believed is also objectively true.

To be eventually integrated in the WP article, knowledge implies to develop particular skills and to evaluate the personal belief-forming processes. Moral virtues also include originality, creativity and inventiveness. Those virtues weren't cited in the article because "if only 5 percent of a creative's thinker original ideas turn out to be true, her creativity is certainly truth conducive because the stock of knowledge of the human race has increaed thorugh her creativity" (source: p. 96).Theologian81sp (talk) 20:24, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Pronunciation

How is her surname pronounced? 86.32.55.188 (talk) 03:07, 29 June 2022 (UTC)