![]() that ones empirical evidence extends beyond the propositions one believes or accepts. LAURENCE BONJOUR THE COHERENCE THEORY OF EMPIRICAL KNOWLEDGE (Received 7 October, 1975) In a paper written for a commemorative symposium on the philosophy of C. The debate between foundationalists and coherentists with regards to what constitutes an adequate theory of. The book concludes with an account of the correspondence theory of empirical truth and an argument that systems of empirical belief which satisfy the coherentist standard of justification are also likely to be true. Coherence theories take all beliefs to be prima facie justified. Epistemic Justification and Empirical Knowledge. In the second part he explores a coherence theory of empirical knowledge and argues that a defensible theory must incorporate an adequate conception of observation. ![]() Soonok Choi - 1992 - Dissertation, The University of Iowa Prodigal Epistemology: Coherence, Holism, and the Sellarsian Tradition. 2 The conclusion ‘Belief B is highly likely to be true’ will have premises of the form (1) ‘B has feature ’ and (2) ‘Beliefs with are highly likely to be true. The first part of the book offers a systematic exposition of foundationalist views and formulates a general argument to show that no variety of foundationalism provides an acceptable account of empirical justification. A Critical Discussion of Bonjour's Coherence Theory of Empirical Knowledge. Here BonJour sets out the most extensive antifoundationalist argument yet developed. What looks like a pyramid is in fact a dead end, a blind alley.īetter by far to choose the raft. 116-117 According to BonJour, 'something like Sellars' view of observation seems to me the basic ingredient which is required if a coherence theory of empirical knowledge is to be even a prima facie candidate for a correct account of empirical knowledge.' 6. ![]() There are two options-the solid securing of the ancient foundationalist pyramid or the risky adventure of the new coherentist raft.įor the foundationalist like Descartes each piece of knowledge can be stacked to build a pyramid. How must our knowledge be systematically organized in order to justify our beliefs? ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |