Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Justification (also called epistemic justification) is a property of beliefs that fulfill certain norms about what a person should believe. [1] [2] Epistemologists often identify justification as a component of knowledge distinguishing it from mere true opinion. [3] They study the reasons why someone holds a belief. [4]
Public reason giving, in the Rawlsian sense, involves justifying a particular position by way of reasons that people of different moral or political backgrounds could accept. Although in his later writings he added what is known as the proviso, meaning that non-public reasons could be given assuming that public reasons would be provided in due ...
Social epistemology also examines the social justification of belief. [ 1 ] One of the enduring difficulties with defining "social epistemology" that arises is the attempt to determine what the word "knowledge" means in this context.
The coherentist theory of justification, which may be interpreted as relating to either theory of coherent truth, characterizes epistemic justification as a property of a belief only if that belief is a member of a coherent set. What distinguishes coherentism from other theories of justification is that the set is the primary bearer of ...
[1] [2] In epistemology, evidence is what justifies beliefs or what determines whether holding a certain doxastic attitude is rational. [3] [4] [5] For example, the olfactory experience of smelling smoke justifies or makes it rational to hold the belief that something is burning. It is usually held that for justification to work, the evidence ...
'The Will to Believe,' accordingly, is the title of my paper." James' central argument in "The Will to Believe" hinges on the idea that access to the evidence for whether certain beliefs are true depends crucially upon first adopting those beliefs without evidence.
System justification theory is a theory within social psychology that system-justifying beliefs serve a psychologically palliative function. It proposes that people have several underlying needs, which vary from individual to individual, that can be satisfied by the defense and justification of the status quo, even when the system may be disadvantageous to certain people.
Foundationalism seeks to escape the regress argument by claiming that there are some beliefs for which it is improper to ask for a justification. (See also a priori.) Foundationalism is the belief that a chain of justification begins with a belief that is justified, but which is not justified by another belief.