Knowledge is normally something we know that is a justifiable true belief. Among the things I consider as knowledge is the phenomenon of water floating on oil. This is a belief I hold in the field of science which has been justified through simple research. It is so simple; I can simply put water in a clear bottle and then add oil, and watch the water float on the oil. It is through such an experiment that I can also prove that this knowledge is true because I can see it practically. This argument on how true this knowledge is may be opposed based on the assumption that my senses may be fooling me. However, the fact that other people see them same results confirms that it is not my senses playing a trick on me (Dyck, 2011, p. 158).
Something that I know but does not meet this criterion is the theory on 9/11 that proposes that the United States government planned the whole attack. This is just a belief that I hold but cannot be proven to be true. This knowledge can be justified by various pieces of information collected during the terror attack plus some arguments made by theorists advancing the theory. However, this factual part of this knowledge cannot be proven as there is likelihood that it is a fact or might be just speculation.
The two examples discussed above show that at times what we know is not always a justified true belief. This helps in showing that no single person can claim to be always right as there are chances that what they know is not a justifiable true belief.
References
Dyck, V. (2011). “Helen Hattab, Descartes on Forms and Mechanisms.” HOPOS: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science 1.1, 157-
161.
