Abstract

This monograph is a critical survey and conceptual classification of recent work in the analysis of non- basic knowledge. The survey extends from the 1950's to Harman's Thought and Lehrer's Knowledge. Although the survey is not all-inclusive, I have examined at least twelve of what I believe to be important and interesting analyses. These analyses fall into three groups: Type I analyses, where the authors have concentrated their attention on the relation between the justifying evidence and false statements; Defeasibility-type analyses; and amalgamations of these two types. It is my conclusion that Type I analyses are wrong-headed, and that, while there are no clearly adequate analyses of the other varieties, they represent attempts in the right direction. An extensive bibliography is included.