عنوان مقاله [English]
According to the traditional definition of knowledge, it seems that the epistemological analysis of error can be conducted through considering any defect in knowledge components: fault belief, false belief, and unjustified belief. However, the arising question is this: Which error is attributable to the believer? When is a believer blamed for possessing a fault or false belief? It seems that he is blameless if he has good reasons for believing that p, even though p is false. The aim of this article is to present an analysis of epistemic error in justification, in externalist reliabilism framework. Firstly, the capacity of chief theories in the general reliabilism is assessed for epistemic error analysis. These are the process reliabilism of Alvin Goldman and truth tracking theory of Robert Nozick. Afterward, the virtue perspectivism of Ernest Sosa is surveyed. This paper will argue that the safety principle, which is introduced as a necessary condition of knowledge by Sosa, is a defendable base for error analysis.