The classical view of self-evident knowledge and justification holds that there are certain kinds of propositions that are known directly and non-inferentially. For example, propositions such as All bachelors are unmarried men are known intuitively in themselves or are narrowly self-evident. We do not even appeal to experience. But Audis discussion uncovers certain problems with this conception of knowledge, especially when one considers those self-evident propositions that are known on the basis of inference, that is, those self-evident propositions that are broadly self-evident and those that are ultimately self-evident, those that are known through a chain a reasoning that is based on premises that are self-evident propositions. These latter kinds of self-evident propositions may involve propositions that are obvious but not self-evident, that is, their truth is not necessary, which is crucial for a self-evident proposition. So, Audi argues we need to modify our conception of self-evident knowledge and justification. You are to write a paper that builds on your discussion of the classical view of self-evident propositions and how they are known. The paper should start with a clear presentation of the classical view of self-evident truth. Then it should consider the conceptual difficulties taken up in chapters 5 and 6 of Epistemology. The paper should then conclude with a discussion of Audis modification of self-evident knowledge and justification, noting the changes in how understand the basis of the claim to knowledge of self-evident propositions, or those propositions based on self-evident ones.