Three arguments against foundationalism: arbitrariness, epistemic regress, and existential support

Canadian Journal of Philosophy 36 (4):535-564 (2006)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Foundationalism is false; after all, foundational beliefs are arbitrary, they do not solve the epistemic regress problem, and they cannot exist withoutother (justified) beliefs. Or so some people say. In this essay, we assess some arguments based on such claims, arguments suggested in recent work by Peter Klein and Ernest Sosa.
Reprint years
2006
ISBN(s)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
HOWTAA
Revision history
Archival date: 2013-03-18
View upload history
References found in this work BETA

View all 27 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

View all 7 citations / Add more citations

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
1,063 ( #1,870 of 42,290 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
173 ( #2,272 of 42,290 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.