Why Bayesian Coherentism Isnt CoherentismReport as inadecuate




Why Bayesian Coherentism Isnt Coherentism - Download this document for free, or read online. Document in PDF available to download.

European journal of analytic philosophy, Vol.11 No.1 May 2016. -

It is sometimes assumed in the Bayesian coherentist literature that the project of finding a truth-conducive measure of coherence of testimonial contents will, if successful, be helpful to the coherentist theory of justification. Various impossibility results in the Bayesian coherentist literature are consequently taken to be prima facie detrimental to the coherentist theory of justification. These attempts to connect Bayesian coherentism to the coherentist- foundationalist debate in classical epistemology rest upon a confusion between the justification of a proposition and the credibility that a proposition has for some other proposition. Foundationalism requires a class of beliefs that have non- inferential justification, not beliefs that have credibility by themselves for others. Coherentists insist that beliefs can be justified only via inferential relations with others, but this does not mean that coherentists must deny that individual propositions can have credibility for other propositions. I analyze and respond to both Erik Olsson-s and Michael Huemer-s arguments concerning the alleged connection between the Bayesian coherentist project and the coherentist theory of justification. Finally, I argue that Bayesian coherentism as represented in the literature, so far from being a version of coherentism, is implicitly foundationalist because of its treatment of -witness reports-, especially the reports of memory and sensation, as given evidence. The impossibility results, based on the assumption of given reports, are therefore not targeted at classical coherentism in epistemology at all.

coherentism; foundationalism; Bayesianism; Bayesian coherentism



Author: Lydia McGrew -

Source: http://hrcak.srce.hr/



DOWNLOAD PDF




Related documents