Note for Epistemology Conversation with Stefan Christopher M. A.

Russo Sunday, 7 August 2011 Primer on Epistemology I Epistemology A Second branch of First Philosophy (First branch is Metaphysics) B Broadly concerned with the study knowledge 1 Knowledge is justified true belief 2 Plato's definition from Socratic dialogue Theaetetus C Some questions Epistemology tries to answer: 1 What is knowledge? 2 How do I obtain knowledge? 3 How do I justify my beliefs? Regress Problem A Formulated by (in chronological order): 1 Sextus Empiricus within Outlines of Pyrrhonism in response to Theaetetus 2 Agrippa the Skeptic as the Agrippa Trilemma 3 Aristotle in Book I of Posterior Analytics 4 20th century German philosopher Hans Albert B Also known as the Mnchhausen Trilemma C Primary problem of Epistemology 1 We justify beliefs with reference to other, prior beliefs 2 For a belief to justify another belief, the justifying belief must itself be justified 3 Belief A Belief B Belief C Belief D ad infinitum 4 Infinite regress denies the possibility of justified true belief. 5 Turtles all the way down. Or a child persistently asking Why? Solutions to the Regress Problem A Foundationalism: The infinite regress is stopped by positing properly basic beliefs from which all other knowledge is justified. 1 Building metaphor 2 Philosophers who accepted Foundationalism: i Most throughout history and through the 18th and 19th centuries ii Plato, Rene Descartes, and Immanuel Kant are notable examples iii Euclid's Elements, a seminal treatise on geometry. 3 Fell out of favor in the late 19th and 20th centuries i Kurt Gdel's incompleteness theorems disproved Foundationalism in advanced mathematics and mathematical logic. ii Philosopher of science Thomas Khun's work The Structure of Scientific Revolutions did similar in science. B Coherentism: The infinite regress is stopped not by positing properly basic beliefs, but through justifying beliefs with respect to how well they fit into a virtuous circle of other beliefs held. 1 Spider Web metaphor i Each belief indirectly plays a part in it's own justification. ii Virtuous circle v. vicious circle

II

III

Quine's Holistic Justification i Found in paper Two Dogmas of Empiricism and The Web of Belief ii Paper is a scathing refutation of Logical Positivism iii One of the most important papers of the 20th century: A must read! 3 Philosophers who accept Conherentism: i Aristotle and Friedrich Nietzsche ii Most (if not almost all) modern scientists and mathematicians Other minority positions include Skepticism and Infinitism, as well as a multitude of other sub-theories and nuances. Questions about Epistemology

Beliefs about which epistemology to use are beliefs themselves in need of justification. How can one justify a belief that an epistemology is correct without begging the question? By this I mean, how can we justify a belief about what belief justification system is correct without reference the belief justification system we are trying to prove true? For example, how can Foundationalism be justified without reference to properly basic beliefs? Stefan, given your dedication to and admiration of science (which is now largely a coherentist venture), what reasons do you have for choosing an alternative epistemic system? Specifically, why Foundationalism over Coherentism?