I.) -Review for the Second Mid-Term-
-Two basic beliefs: (1) Coherentism and (2) Foundationalism.
-Regress Problem: infinity..->...->d->c->b->a, where does justification stop?
-Foundationalism = Belief that justification springs from a special class of beliefs not based on any other beliefs. All philosophers in the 20th century (i.e. Descartes, Locke, Hume, Aristotle, Plato, and Berkely) were foundationalists. Plato and Descates are rationalist Foundationalists. Meaning, Math/logic are seen as "properly basic," and the empericists add evidence of the senses as properly basic too.
-Properly basic = A belief which justifiably is not believed on the basis of another belief (non-inferential).
-Classical foundationalist = everyone/thing before the 20th century, which were the Rationalists and Empericists (Kant was a combination of the two).
-"The Myth of the Given" = raw uninterpreted sense experiences which we cannot be mistaken about. Example: "I seem to see Red," or "I am in pain." They are challenged as imfalliable: (1)To the extent that these experiences are raw and uninterpreted, they can't serve as a foundation for beliefs. (2)To the extent that these experiences are conceptualized, so that they can serve as a foundation, they become fallible.
-Fallbilism = possibly false beliefs can go in the foundation/be properly basic.
-Advantages to Foundationalism:
If it works, it seems the most certain way of justifying beliefs. Based on something solid. In theory it looks like the best bet.
-Problems with Foundationalism
(1)Disagreement about what goes in foundation
(2)Can't be justified by its own standard.
(3)Foundationalism is not a justifiable belief.
(4)Its hard to justify many common sense beliefs.
(5)You will end up a skeptic.
-Coherentism-
Justification is a feature of a mutually supportive system of beliefs, with any particular belief being justified by its role in the system as a whole.
-Advantages: (1)Its the way that science/Math works
(2)Its the way we justify beliefs in practice.
(3)Practical short cuts
-Problems: (1)Leads to dogmatic approaches to new beliefs. It inclines people to form beliefs based on Ideology vs. evidence.
(2)Consistency is a necessity, but not a sufficient condition for truth.
(3)Doesn't tie beliefs to the external world sufficiently.