Final answer:
Wolf's counterexamples to the Bipartite View of meaningfulness can be seen in the cases of the nomad and Henry, where the beliefs are not appropriately connected to the evidence. These counterexamples challenge the validity of the Bipartite View.
Step-by-step explanation:
Wolf's counterexamples to the Bipartite View of meaningfulness can be seen in the cases of the nomad and Henry. In the nomad case, the belief that there is water in the valley is not appropriately connected to the evidence used to deduce that belief. The nomad believes there is water based on the mistaken belief that a mirage is an oasis. In the case of Henry, his belief that he is looking at a barn is based on his perceptual experience of a real barn, but it is a matter of luck that he isn't looking at a barn facade. These counterexamples show that there can be meaningful beliefs that do not meet the criteria of the Bipartite View, undermining its validity.