The defeasible nature of coherentist justification

Forskningsoutput: TidskriftsbidragArtikel i vetenskaplig tidskrift

Abstract

The impossibility results of Bovens and Hartmann (2003, Bayesian epistemology. Oxford: Clarendon Press) and Olsson (2005, Against coherence: Truth, probability and justification. Oxford: Oxford University Press.) show that the link between coherence and probability is not as strong as some have supposed. This paper is an attempt to bring out a way in which coherence reasoning nevertheless can be justified, based on the idea that, even if it does not provide an infallible guide to probability, it can give us an indication thereof. It is further shown that this actually is the case, for several of the coherence measures discussed in the literature so far. We also discuss how this affects the possibility to use coherence as a means of epistemic justification.

Detaljer

Författare
  • Staffan Angere
Enheter & grupper
Forskningsområden

Ämnesklassifikation (UKÄ) – OBLIGATORISK

  • Filosofi

Nyckelord

Originalspråkengelska
Sidor (från-till)321-335
TidskriftSynthese
Volym157
Utgåva nummer3
StatusPublished - 2007
PublikationskategoriForskning
Peer review utfördJa