David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Synthese 157 (3):347 - 360 (2007)
If coherence is to have justificatory status, as some analytical philosophers think it has, it must be truth-conducive, if perhaps only under certain specific conditions. This paper is a critical discussion of some recent arguments that seek to show that under no reasonable conditions can coherence be truth-conducive. More specifically, it considers Bovens and Hartmann’s and Olsson’s “impossibility results,” which attempt to show that coherence cannot possibly be a truth-conducive property. We point to various ways in which the advocates of a coherence theory of justification may attempt to divert the threat of these results.
|Keywords||Coherence Truth Probability Bovens Hartmann Olsson|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Peter Lipton (2004). Inference to the Best Explanation. Routledge/Taylor and Francis Group.
Luc Bovens & Stephan Hartmann (2003). Bayesian Epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Erik J. Olsson (2005). Against Coherence: Truth, Probability, and Justification. Oxford University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
Michael Schippers (2014). Coherence, Striking Agreement, and Reliability. Synthese 191 (15):3661-3684.
Stefan Schubert (2012). Is Coherence Conducive to Reliability? Synthese 187 (2):607-621.
By Igor Douven (2008). The Lottery Paradox and Our Epistemic Goal. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 89 (2):204–225.
William Roche (2012). Witness Agreement and the Truth-Conduciveness of Coherentist Justification. Southern Journal of Philosophy 50 (1):151-169.
William A. Roche (2010). Coherentism, Truth, and Witness Agreement. Acta Analytica 25 (2):243-257.
Similar books and articles
Charles B. Cross (1999). Coherence and Truth Conducive Justification. Analysis 59 (263):186–193.
Erik J. Olsson & Stefan Schubert (2007). Reliability Conducive Measures of Coherence. Synthese 157 (3):297 - 308.
Staffan Angere (2007). The Defeasible Nature of Coherentist Justification. Synthese 157 (3):321 - 335.
Wouter Meijs (2007). A Corrective to Bovens and Hartmann's Measure of Coherence. Philosophical Studies 133 (2):151 - 180.
Staffan Angere (2008). Coherence as a Heuristic. Mind 117 (465):1-26.
Gregory Wheeler (2012). Explaining the Limits of Olsson's Impossibility Result. Southern Journal of Philosophy 50 (1):136-150.
Luca Moretti (2007). Ways in Which Coherence is Confirmation Conducive. Synthese 157 (3):309 - 319.
W. Meijs (2007). A Corrective to Bovens and Hartmann's Measure of Coherence. Philosophical Studies 133 (2):151 - 180.
Erik J. Olsson (2005). The Impossibility of Coherence. Erkenntnis 63 (3):387 - 412.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads49 ( #90,684 of 1,934,535 )
Recent downloads (6 months)6 ( #91,699 of 1,934,535 )
How can I increase my downloads?