Advertisement

Personal Coherence, Objectivity, and Reliability

  • G. J. Mattey
Part of the Philosophical Studies Series book series (PSSP, volume 44)

Abstract

The most troubling criticism of coherence theories of justification is that coherence within a system has no apparent connection with the truth. Johnathan Dancy claims that coherence theories leave us with a “mystery,” insofar as “it would be difficult to find a reason for thinking that where the internal relation of justification is present, the external relation of truth is present also” (117). John Pollock calls this the “isolation argument.” “According to coherence theories, justification is ultimately a matter of relations between propositions one believes, and has nothing to do with the way the world is. But our objective in seeking knowledge is to find out the way the world is. Thus coherence theories are inadequate” (76).1

Keywords

Justify Belief Objective Probability Verific System Acceptance System Perceptual Belief 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. BonJour, Laurence. The Structure of Empirical Knowledge. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1985.Google Scholar
  2. Chisholm, Roderick. “The Problem of the Criterion,” in The Foundations of Knowing. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1982, 61–75.Google Scholar
  3. BonJour, Laurence. Theory of Knowledge. 2nd. ed. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1977.Google Scholar
  4. Cornman, James W. Skepticism, Justification, and Explanation. Philosophical Studies Series in Philosophy 18. Dordrecht: D. Reidel, 1980.Google Scholar
  5. Dancy, Johnathan. An Introduction to Contemporary Epistemology. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1985.Google Scholar
  6. Goldman, Alvin. Epistemology and Cognition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1986.Google Scholar
  7. Hume, David. An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. 2nd. ed. L. A. Selby-Bigge, ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1966.Google Scholar
  8. James, William. “The Will to Believe.” The Writings of William James: A Comprehensive Edition. John J. McDermott., ed., Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977, 771–735.Google Scholar
  9. Lehrer, Keith. “Coherence and the Hierarchy of Method,” in Essays in Scientific Method: Dedicated to Paul Weingartner. Edgar Morscher, Otto Neumaier, Gerhard Zecha, eds., Bad Reichendall, Austria: Comes Verlag, 1981, 25–56.Google Scholar
  10. Lehrer, Keith. “The Coherence Theory of Knowledge.” Philosophical Topics 14 (1986), 5–25.Google Scholar
  11. Lehrer, Keith. Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1974.Google Scholar
  12. Lehrer, Keith. “The Knowledge Cycle.” Nous 11 (1977), 17–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lehrer, Keith. “Knowledge, Truth and Ontology,” in Language and Ontology: Proceedings of the Sixth I International Wittgenstein Sumposium, Werner Leinfellner, Eric Kraemer, and Jeffrey Schank, eds., Vienna: Hulder-Pichler-Tempsky, 1982, 201–11.Google Scholar
  14. Lehrer, Keith. “A Self Profile,” in Keith Lehrer. Radu J. Bogdan, ed., Dordrecht: D. Reidel, 1981, 3–104.Google Scholar
  15. Lehrer, Keith, and Cohen, Stewart. “Justification, Truth, and Coherence.” Synthese 2 (1983), 191–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Plato. Theaetetus. F. M. Cornford, tr., The Collected Dialogues of Plato, Edith Hamilton and Huntington Cairns, eds., Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1971, 845–919.Google Scholar
  17. Pollock, John L. Contemporary Theories of Knowledge. Totowa, N.J.: Rowman & Littlefield, 1986.Google Scholar
  18. Sosa, Ernest. “The Raft and the Pyramid: Coherence versus Foundations in the Theory of Knowledge,” in Studies in Epistemology, Midwest Studies in Philosophy Volume 5, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1980, 2–25.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. J. Mattey
    • 1
  1. 1.University of California at DavisUSA

Personalised recommendations