Author: Howard-Snyder Daniel
Publisher: Springer Publishing Company
ISSN: 0165-0106
Source: Erkenntnis, Vol.60, Iss.1, 2004-01, pp. : 51-73
Disclaimer: Any content in publications that violate the sovereignty, the constitution or regulations of the PRC is not accepted or approved by CNPIEC.
Abstract
In this essay, I assess Keith Lehrer's case against Foundationalism, which consists of variations on three objections: The Independent Information or Belief Objection, The Risk of Error Objection, and the Hidden Argument Objection. I conclude that each objection fails for reasons that can be endorsed – indeed, I would say for reasons that
Related content
Foundationalism and Peter's Confession
Religious Studies, Vol. 26, Iss. 3, 1990-09 ,pp. :
Foundationalism and the Justification of Religious Belief
Religious Studies, Vol. 19, Iss. 3, 1983-09 ,pp. :
Lehrer and Ellis on incorrigibility
Australasian Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 55, Iss. 3, 1977-12 ,pp. :
A role for abstractionism in a direct realist foundationalism
Synthese, Vol. 180, Iss. 3, 2011-06 ,pp. :