Pick the most suitable and easiest to you

The Traditional Analysis of Knowledge The Traditional Analysis of Knowledge is a model of understanding propositionalknowledge. This is a conception of knowledge referred to as the Justified True Belief that was first put forward by Plato (Nozick, 7). Under Justified True Belief, knowledge and the meaning contained in sentences can be derived using the below set of conditions, which are necessary and mutually sufficient:
S knows that p (any idea or issue)
(i) P is true,
(ii) S believes that P, and,
(iii) S is justified in believing that P.
An important premise in JTB is that the individual believes that p, and that he/she believes that p is indeed true and correct. If p is not correct, it would not be knowledge. Lastly, there needs to be justification that supports p. such justification could be some kind of evidence or reasons. The lack of such support would make p only to be correct but not knowledge. These sets of conditions greatly rely on the necessity and sufficiency relationship that argues that one set of condition has to be true for the other to be true. A necessary condition makes a statement to be true while a sufficient condition links the truth within a statement to its ultimate consequent. A condition can be necessary or sufficient or both.
The Gettier problem refers to a philosophical reasoning that questions whether something that is held to be true but is based on invalid reasons counts as true knowledge (Pollock and Cruz, 12). Initially put forward by Edmund Gettier, it is used to refer to all major thought experiments that repute the definition of Justified True Belief. Gettier argued that there were beliefs and statements that were true and justified, hence necessary and sufficient, but were not valid pieces of knowledge
Works cited
Nozick, Robert. Philosophical Explanations. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press, 1981. Print.
Pollock John and Cruz Joseph. Contemporary theories of knowledge, New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 1999. Print.