Ep&Meth (Notes). Theo Todman. Dancy – Contemporary Epistemology [email protected] 19/09/ Page 1 of CONTENTS. INTRODUCTION. Introduction to Contemporary Epistemology has 69 ratings and 5 reviews. Richard said: This is a good overview of Contemporary Epistemology – but don’t th. This volume represents the most comprehensive and authoritative collection of canonical readings in theory of knowledge. Concentration on the central topics of .

Author: Tokus Mikakora
Country: El Salvador
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Career
Published (Last): 27 September 2004
Pages: 359
PDF File Size: 19.56 Mb
ePub File Size: 20.67 Mb
ISBN: 373-7-86533-818-8
Downloads: 63146
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Tejind

And this is a weakness not shared by his opponent. He has been put in the position of maintaining that belief-sets which bear no relation to anyone’s experience may have all the defining characteristics of coherence.

We shall see why soon. Nothing in the notion of coherence, as defined, gives us any right to say that there is a unique most coherent set.

This is a form of fallibilism see 4. Paperbackpages. Nicolas Valentino rated it liked it Nov 04, And if he does share it, the required results will emerge. And like entailment, explanation should be viewed holistically rather than atomistically.

We might try to do so by distinguishing between two sorts of security that beliefs can have, antecedent and subsequent. Subsequent security is security which a belief acquires as a result of its contribution to the coherence of the set. Coherentists would claim that this holistic theory fits our actual practice far better than the more restrictive foundationalist account. Any belief will remain until there is some reason to reject it.

Suppose that, as EwingRescher and Lehrer suggest, we adopt a coherence theory of justification but reject the coherence theory of truth. This objection, like so many other annihilating criticisms, would have more point if anyone had ever held the theory it demolishes. But there is no such thing as a theory-free, external, viewpoint. Want to Read Currently Reading Read.


Introduction to Contemporary Epistemology

Mar 17, Nat rated it liked it. But I think that this would be to miss the point. Contempoary it is the basis of our remark above that entail- ment is not a matter of degree. Ramel rated it really liked it Jun 17, First we can say that for the coherentist each theory is incompatible with every other because one cannot embrace two theories at once, on pain of loss of coherence.

For it appears to reintroduce a distinction between two sorts of justification. Propositions cannot be coherent, in the required sense, and sets cannot be called true unless they are members of larger sets.

History of Western Philosophy. But then it would be difficult to find a reason for thinking that where the internal relation of justification is present, the external relation of truth is probably present too.

If there is more than one theory equally effective in handling the evidence, what are we to say about the different theories? The problem then is whether the coherentist can be an empiricist, not whether he should be one.

So in this respect also our theory of truth fits our theory of justification. Foundationalists suppose that we need not only basic beliefs but also principles of inference to take us from those beliefs to the more sophisticated superstructure. The Theory of Knowledge: But they can be justified in the now familiar way, by appeal to the increase in coherence which results from the adoption of a principle. If a coherentist requires for justification that all cognitive elements be interconnected, there is no possibility that beliefs wholly disconnected from sensory experience might yet count as justified, once we take experience to be cognitive.

An Introduction to Contemporary Epistemology

Classic Problems and Contemporary Responses. The theory of truth ought to fit the epistemology and not be allowed to ride independent of it. First, those objects whose justification we are considering are belief-sets, and all the belief-sets with which we are familiar our own and those of our contemporaries are as a matter of fact empirically based.


This will be important in what follows. And this ddancy not just because it becomes more complete; completeness can hardly be a virtue tto itself.

An introduction to contemporary epistemology | Jonathan Dancy –

That notion, as Blanshard uses it, is symmetrical enough. For the question really is whether this sort-of antecedent security, if we are forced to admit it, amounts to an asymmetry in the account we give of justification and thus to a two- tier theory of justification such as only the foundationalist can provide.

But this amounts to abandoning our coherentist monism and resort- ing to the sort of asymmetry characteristic of foundationalism. The notion of coherence, on jonatjan a more completely holistic theory is based, is intended to be symmetrical. There are no discussion topics on this book yet.

But I think that the mutual explanation account restates rather than replaces Blanshard’s use of entailment. Coherentists also suppose that just as their approach provides a possible justification of induction, so it offers a general stance from which the sceptic can be introductoin, if not rebutted.

Introduction to Contemporary Epistemology | Epistemology | General Philosophy | Subjects | Wiley

Empiricism and coherentism are incompatible. This notion of jonatyan tion is relative to individual believers. I would recommend this book if you already have had some introductory philosophy that includes some epistemology, and have sampled of some readings in philosophy that are not to difficult. But they are still justified for a.