Nozick agrees that the Gettier counterexamples to the JTB analysis of knowledge are cases where someone has a JTB but does not know. What is his explanation of what has gone wrong in those cases? Specifically what conditions in Nozick’s account of knowledge are not satisfied?
Yes I believe it is his counterfactual statements.
One’s true belief that p is knowledge if and only if the following two conditions hold:
- if p were not the case, one would not believe that p,
- and if p were the case, one would believe that p.
I've only just started to research it myself, but this might help: http://www.iep.utm.edu/epis-clo/#SH3b