Gettier cases for the knowledge-based account of moral worth—a reply to Huang

Whether moral knowledge is necessary for moral worth is a matter of current debate. Neil Sinhababu (2024) argues that the two prominent knowledge accounts of moral worth are false because Gettier cases show that the kind of non-accidental condition for moral worth is different from those required by knowledge. That is, in Gettier cases where one is equipped with justified true belief rather than the relative moral knowledge required for moral worth, it appears that the agent’s action is morally worthy. Huang (2025) argues that the Gettier case given by Sinhababu cannot support the claim that moral knowledge is unnecessary for moral worth. This paper aims to defend Sinhababu’s Gettier objection to the knowledge account of moral worth from Huang.