On a “Fatal Dilemma” for Moderate Foundationalism

Abstract

Contemporary foundationalists prefer Moderate Foundationalism over Strong Foundationalism. In this paper, we assess two arguments against the former which have been recently defended by Timothy McGrew. Three theses are central to the discussion: that only beliefs can be probabilifying evidence, that justification is internal, in McGrew’s sense of the term, and that only beliefs can be nonarbitrary justifying reasons.

Download options

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 72,805

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-02-17

Downloads
11 (#859,682)

6 months
1 (#386,499)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Daniel Howard-Snyder
Western Washington University
Christian Lee
Western Washington University

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

On a “Fatal Dilemma” for Moderate Foundationalism.Daniel Howard-Snyder & Christian Lee - 2005 - Journal of Philosophical Research 30:251-259.
Foundationalism.Daniel Howard-Snyder - 2012 - In Andrew Cullison (ed.), The Continuum Companion to Epistemology. Continuum. pp. 37.
Foundationalism and Arbitrariness.Daniel Howard-Snyder - 2005 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 86 (1):18–24.
Rorty's Critique of Foundationalism.Timm Triplett - 1987 - Philosophical Studies 52 (1):115 - 129.
The Confusion Over Foundationalism.Jonathan L. Kvanvig - 1986 - Philosophia 16 (3-4):345-354.
The Foundations of Knowledge.Timothy J. McGrew - 1995 - Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
A Fatal Dilemma For Direct Realist Foundationalism.Jeremy Randel Koons - 2015 - Journal of Philosophical Research 40:405-440.