This paper is the first part of a series of articles about the structure of justification. I outline the so-called infinite regress problem and focus on three corresponding positions: skepticism (concerning justification), infinitism, and coherentism. Skepticism found its expression in Agrippa’s trilemma. Infinitism has been developed by Peter Klein and Scott Aikin. Coherentism is (primarily) discussed in its holistic version. I present different concepts of coherence and coherent justification, point out the main objections to coherentism and some ways to rebut them. General considerations concerning coherentism are illustrated by solutions included in the theories of Laurence BonJour and Thomas Bartelborth.
This paper is the second part of a series of articles concerning the structure of justification. The author discusses foundationalism - the most often adopted position on this issue. He distinguishes different kinds of this position and points out the main objections against it. General considerations concerning foundationalism are illustrated by solutions included in the theories of “the late” Laurence BonJour and Robert Audi.
This paper is the last part of a series of three articles concerning the structure of justification. The author discusses contextualism regarding the structure of justification in the versions put forward by David Annis and Michael Williams. Williams explicitly contrasts his view with both foundationalist and coherentist theories. He gives a novel and valuable account of the system of beliefs and the structure of justification. Still, one can have doubts as to its normative dimension, i.e. as to whether it correctly shows what the structure of justification should be like from the epistemic point of view.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.