Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that DB alone is insufficient to fully account for the justification of basic beliefs

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.DB's negative specification—that basic beliefs are not inferentially justified—is itself a substantive positive constraint that delimits the justificatory structure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.For foundationalists like Roderick Chisholm, the non-inferential character of basic beliefs is not a gap but the very feature that confers their epistemic autonomy and regress-stopping function.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A structural account of justification need not provide a causal or genetic story; specifying the logical role of basic beliefs within the system is sufficient for a complete foundationalist theory.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Sellars and later coherentists conflate the genetic question of what causes belief with the normative question of what justifies it, a distinction Laurence BonJour later acknowledged undermines the demand for a positive account beyond DB.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If DB entails that basic beliefs are justified by non-doxastic states such as perceptual experience, as argued by dogmatists like James Pryor, then DB implicitly contains a positive justificatory story rather than leaving one absent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.DB only specifies how belief (B) is not justified (i.e., not by inference from other beliefs)
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.An account of what positively justifies belief (B) is needed in addition to DB
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.