Theories of Knowledge, PHL 202

Review on Intervalism-

Intervalism: justification is a matter of "reflective access" good to convincing reasons ("reflective access= you know what the reasons are if you think about it)

Intervalism views include Foundationalism (emphasis on the good) and coherentism (emphasis on the convincing)

Intervalism is sometimes called a normative concept, (example: I am justified in believing that x=x, as a reasonable person in my situation would believe that x=x. Therefore, I have done my epistemic duty with regard to x)

Externalism (specifically reliablism): reflective access to justifying reasons NOT necessary for justification

*Justification comes from one's beliefs being formed by a reliable true-conducive process

Example: An idiot (autistic :)) savant- reliable process, accurate in day of week on any date was, but can't tell you how he does it OR a supposed reliable psychic; someone with "good" instincts

*Some add an internalist constraint: you need to know the process is reliable

"The Power of Belief"

This is internalism, because it's normative and seems to require control over beliefs

Two "supposed" ways to control beliefs:

1) DIRECT- Believe what you want/ many logical, mathematical, even historical beliefs seem out of our direct control- does this imply we have more control over UNCERTAIN beliefs?

2) INDIRECT- careful investigation of evidence/ often simply attempts to rationalize pre-existing beliefs

People seem to gravitate towards experiences which reinforce their beliefs, ie books, friends, family, etc.