Coherentism Vs Coherentism

1465 Words6 Pages
Coherentism has not gain much recognition throughout the history of philosophy. According to the traditional definition of knowledge, knowledge is Justified True Belief. Hence, one must first justify their belief before they can acquire any knowledge. Since most of the time the knowledge we assume we have justified are beliefs that are justified based on other belief. Consequently, this promotes the concept of regress argument where the philosophers are on the quest to understand how a belief is justified. Coherentist attempts to solve the regress problem by suggesting a system of beliefs where the justification is done by referring to other beliefs within the relevant system. In this essay, I will be focused on two of the main objections to coherentism: isolation and alternative objection. While at the same time examines the concept of coherentism to determine…show more content…
While there are lots of misconception about coherentism for leading the regress into circle, by denying the assumption that justification requires the existence of an inferential chain of reasons, they claim it should be viewed as holistic in character instead. Other philosophers argued, for such a system of beliefs to function properly, it still require the beliefs to be justified circulatory, because all the individual beliefs that make up the system are related to one another in a circular fashion. There are many objections to the fundamental concept of coherentism, and they are: the input and isolation objection, the alternative systems objection, and the objection of truth connection. These objections do not need to be viewed separately. They can be divided into two common objections for coherentism. Despite the attempt, coherentism still fails to solve the regress problem and provide adequate respond to the

    More about Coherentism Vs Coherentism

      Open Document