A brief explanation of my screen name using a part of the Sosis article as an example.

My screen name, JTB, is short for 'justified true Belief.' The Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (SEP), in an essay titled, "A Priori Justification and Knowledge," explains that "Having a JTB is not sufficient for knowledge, but that it does seem necessary." "Using Edmund Getters' argument," the SEP states- "Knowledge is generally thought to require justified true belief, even if justified true belief is not sufficient for knowledge." The article then gives an example of this idea in action, and I paraphrase: "You see poodles in a field that have been bred and clipped to look like sheep and on this basis you believe that there are sheep in the field. Luckily there are some sheep in the field, but they are hiding behind boulders. So you have a JTB that is not knowledge."
My point is, that when it comes to religion and spirituality, we all are, in a cosmological sense, staring out across the same field and, depending on our perspective, there is much that is hidden from us. So, as a rational agnostic (if there is such a thing), when I look across this particular field, I ask myself, 'what JTB can I possess that is knowable (if any), and is there a method that I can employ to measure another's belief?'
For example. In the case of the Sosis article on "The adaptive Value of Religious Ritual." Sosis quotes an Israeli biologist, Amotz Zahavi, who interprets the Springbok antelopes habit of jumping straight up and down when threatened, as analogous to the intense ritual behavior of certain religious groups (If you want to know the details, you'll have to read the article). From his place 'in the field,' this is a JTB... From mine, after a little google searching, I discover that there are other explanations for the Springbok's behavior: "It communicates alarm, gives the animal a better view of the predator, and also confuses or even intimidates it-" Taken from The Honolulu zoo website. Could I, in turn, use these facts to argue in favor of a contrary analogy, from my perspective 'in the field?'
Of course.