Abstract

This book aims to show that a novel version of the coherence theory of empirical justification is superior, from an explanatory point of view, to the competing versions of foundationalism. The book's main test for explanatory superiority focuses on how the competing theories purport to solve the epistemic regress problem, the problem of specifying whether, and if so how, one empirical belief can be inferentially justified on the basis of another. The foundationalist proposes that all inferentially justified empirical beliefs are justified on the basis of noninferentially justified empirical beliefs, beliefs whose justification does not depend on the justification of further empirical beliefs. The coherentist denies that there are noninferentially justified empirical beliefs, and proposes instead that all empirical justification derives from an antecedent system of empirical beliefs.