Foundationalism , Epistemic Principles , and the Cartesian Circle
نویسنده
چکیده
T HE problem of the Cartesian Circle is sometimes treated as though it were merely an exercise for scholars: Descartes fell into it, and their job is to get him out of it. But more is at stake than extricating Descartes. In its generalized form, the Cartesian Circle is none other than the Problem of the Criterion, a problem that any epistemology must face. Moreover, to solve the problem of the Circle one must answer questions about epistemic principles that are pivotal in contemporary debates between foundationalists and coherentists. There is reason to hope, therefore, that by examining Descartes's problem we can throw light on problems of our own. This paper is divided into two parts. In Part One I examine solutions to the problem of the Circle that are possible within Descartes's own framework. In Part Two I show how what we learn in Part One may be used to resolve some contemporary disputes that hinge on the status of epistemic principles.
منابع مشابه
Epistemic Structure of Islamic Philosophies of Education: Foundationalism or Coherentism
Epistemic Structure of Islamic Philosophies of Education: Foundationalism or Coherentism M.R. Madanifar N. Sajjaadiyeh, Ph.D. Given the two approaches to epistemology emphasizing foundationalism or coherentism, it is of interest to know if the epistemic structure of Islamic philosophies of education is related to any of these two or has a structure of its own, given that each...
متن کاملThe Vienna Circle's 'Anti-Foundationalism'
Thomas E. Uebel has recently claimed that, contrary to popular opinion, none of the philosophers of the Vienna Circle of Logical Positivists were proponents of epistemological foundationalism. According to the considerations of the current discussion, however, Uebel's conclusion is erroneous, especially with respect to the work of Moritz Schlick. The chief reason Uebel offers to support his con...
متن کاملFoundationalism for Modest Infinitists
Infinitists argue that their view outshines foundationalism because infinitism can, whereas foundationalism cannot, explain two of epistemic justification’s crucial features: it comes in degrees and it can be complete. I present four different ways that foundationalists could make sense of those two features of justification, thereby undermining the case for infinitism.
متن کاملIntemalist and Extemalist Foundationalism
The traditional debate over skepticism has largely presupposed the framework of foundationalism. With the rise of the intemalism/externalism debate in epistemology, however, it is apparent that there are radically different ways to understand foundational justification. In this chapter we begin by examining the traditional epistemic regress argument for foundationalism. Before presenting what I...
متن کاملCritical Notice Rational Starting Points
Epistemic justification has been claimed to be a special case of argument by philosophers such as Accordingly for each attempt, epistemic justification is the occasion of the arguer making a case for some conclusion based on other premises, when the audience and the arguer are the same person. The dialectical model of argument is used to inform how it is that a subject could come to justify her...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2008