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
    The resulting regress must either loop back to a prior be... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→If there are justified beliefs, there must be basic beliefs.

    The resulting regress must either loop back to a prior belief in the chain, continue infinitely, or terminate in a basic belief.

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge

    Related

    A justificatory chain that continues infinitely is unacceptable as a source of j...A justificatory chain that loops back to a prior belief is unacceptable as a sou...For every justified belief B1, B1's justification must come from somewhere.If B1 is not basic, its justification must come from another justified belief B2...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Skepticism
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    +2 moreShow less
    If B2 is not basic, its justification must come from another justified belief B3...If there are justified beliefs, there must be basic beliefs.

    Similar

    This regress proceeds without end.81%If every cognition requires a further cognition to illumine it, the re...81%Even if an infinite regress were not vicious in principle, finite mind...81%An infinite regress in justification must be avoided.79%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: epistemology
    View source passageHide passage
    The main argument for foundationalism is called the regress argument. It’s an argument from elimination. With regard to every justified belief, B1, the question arises of where B1’s justification comes from. If B1 is not basic, it would have to come from another belief, B2. But B2 can justify B1 only if B2 is justified itself. If B2 is basic, the justificatory chain would end with B2. But if B2 is not basic, we need a further belief, B3. If B3 is not basic, we need a fourth belief, and so forth.

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective