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 Some beliefs must have justification without depending on other beliefs (foundationalism is true)

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Justification can be constituted by coherence relations among beliefs in a web, without any belief serving as a terminal anchor.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The regress problem presupposes a linear, hierarchical model of justification that coherentism's holistic structure does not share.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A belief system gains justification through mutual support and explanatory integration, not through derivation from privileged foundations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Infinitism, as defended by Peter Klein, holds that an infinite non-repeating chain of reasons is the correct response to the regress, not a vicious one.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Finite beings need not complete an infinite chain to be justified; having the disposition to provide further reasons at each stage is sufficient for justification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The argument from finite cognitive capacity conflates completing an inference chain with being embedded in a potentially infinite structure of available reasons.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.One cannot acquire justification for a belief by inferring it from an unjustified belief
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.One cannot acquire justification for a belief by way of circular inferential justification
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If all justification is inferential, then for any justified belief P, there must be a prior justified belief E1 from which P is inferred
      ?

      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.