Unraveling the complex tapestry of personal beliefs, we delve into the intricacies of justification. Prepare to challenge your convictions, as we explore why substantiating our deeply held views may be more difficult than we initially perceive.
Epistemic justification is the area of philosophy that asks: what counts as enough to justify a belief?
Coherentism is the theory that states a belief is justified insofar as it coheres or is consistent with our other beliefs.
- It is a great theory to call out inconsistencies of others, but it has been criticized for allowing circular reasoning.
Circular reasoning is great because I said so
Coherentism is an “internalist” theory
- It concerns only internal consistency in one’s own views
- If we can be justified in believing things based on no other authority than my own beliefs, then it allows the possibility of any outlandish beliefs
- Conspiracy theories love the fertile ground of an internalist justification system
Learn to stop worrying and love circular reasoning
Coherentism is a view that settles for circular reasoning knowingly because the alternatives are just as bad, if not worse
- Jonny Thomson teaches philosophy in Oxford, and runs an Instagram account called Mini Philosophy (@philosophyminis)
- He teaches philosophy at Oxford University
Waxing poetic for noetics
Coherentism is a view that settles for circular reasoning because the alternatives are just as bad, if not worse
- Any belief is justified if and only if it coheres with one’s other beliefs
- It sees beliefs as framed and nestled in a wider web of beliefs, known as the noetic structure
Pluto still isn’t a planet
Coherentism argues that a belief is considered to be more or less justified on the basis of how far it agrees with other beliefs
- For example, one might say that their belief in atoms is fairly well justified because it coheres with a whole web of interconnected beliefs about the world.
- However, their belief that Pluto is a planet likely has fewer connections to their noetic structure.
