Knowledge has traditionally been understood as a special kind of belief that satisfies certain conditions distinguishing it from mere opinion or guesswork. One of the most influential analyses in epistemology is the theory that knowledge is Justified True Belief (JTB). This conception, rooted in the works of Plato and developed by later philosophers, remained the dominant account of knowledge for centuries. According to this theory, a person knows a proposition if and only if the proposition is true, the person believes it, and the person is justified in believing it. Although the JTB theory appears intuitive and logically appealing, twentieth-century philosophical debates, particularly after Edmund Gettier's famous paper in 1963, raised serious doubts about its adequacy. The JTB analysis consists of three necessary conditions. The first condition is belief. Knowledge requires that the subject actually believes the proposition in question. If someone does not believe that it is raining outside, it would be inappropriate to say that the person knows it is raining, even if it is in fact raining. Belief is therefore considered an indispensable psychological component of knowledge. Knowledge cannot exist independently of the knower's acceptance of the proposition. The second condition is truth. A proposition must be true to qualify as knowledge. False beliefs, no matter how sincerely held or well-supported, cannot count as knowledge. For example, if someone believes that Delhi is the capital of India, the belief qualifies for knowledge because it corresponds with reality. However, if someone believes that Mumbai is the capital of India, the belief cannot be knowledge because it is false. Truth thus provides the objective dimension of knowledge. The third condition is justification. A person must have good reasons, evidence, or rational grounds for holding the belief. Mere lucky guessing does not amount to knowledge even if the guessed proposition turns out to be true. Suppose a student predicts correctly that a particular question will appear in an examination merely by chance. Although the belief is true, it lacks justification. Justification separates rational belief from accidental correctness and ensures that knowledge is epistemically responsible. These three conditions together form the classical definition of knowledge. Symbolically, S knows that P if and only if: P is true; S believes that P; and S is justified in believing that P. Each condition is individually necessary, and together they were traditionally regarded as sufficient for knowledge. The roots of the JTB theory can be traced to Plato's dialogue *Theaetetus*. Plato distinguished knowledge from true opinion by arguing that true belief becomes knowledge when accompanied by a rational account or explanation. Although Plato himself did not finally endorse a complete definition of knowledge, later philosophers interpreted his discussion as supporting the idea that knowledge consists of justified true belief. This formulation became highly influential in both rationalist and empiricist traditions. The appeal of the JTB theory lies in its ability to explain ordinary epistemic judgments. It distinguishes informed belief from mere opinion and emphasizes the importance of evidence and rational inquiry. Scientific knowledge, historical knowledge, and everyday practical knowledge generally involve beliefs that