Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Special pages
Niidae Wiki
Search
Search
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
Foundationalism
(section)
Page
Discussion
English
Read
Edit
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Page information
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
==Criticisms== {{See also|Anti-foundationalism}} Critics of foundationalism often argue that for a belief to be justified it must be supported by other beliefs;<ref name=SEP/> in [[Donald Davidson (philosopher)|Donald Davidson]]'s phrase, "only a belief can be a reason for another belief". For instance, [[Wilfrid Sellars]] argued that non-[[doxastic logic|doxastic]] mental states cannot be reasons, and so noninferential warrant cannot be derived from them. Similarly, critics of [[externalist]] foundationalism argue that only mental states or properties the believer is aware of could make a belief justified. [[Postmodernists]] and [[post-structuralism|post-structuralists]] such as [[Richard Rorty]] and [[Jacques Derrida]] have attacked foundationalism on the grounds that the truth of a statement or discourse is only verifiable in accordance with other statements and discourses. Rorty in particular elaborates further on this, claiming that the individual, the community, the human body as a whole have a 'means by which they know the world' (this entails language, culture, semiotic systems, mathematics, science etc.). In order to verify particular means, or particular statements belonging to certain means (e.g., the propositions of the natural sciences), a person would have to 'step outside' the means and critique them neutrally, in order to provide a foundation for adopting them. However, this is impossible. The only way in which one can know the world is through the means by which they know the world; a method cannot justify itself. This argument can be seen as directly related to [[Wittgenstein]]'s theory of language, drawing a parallel between postmodernism and late [[logical positivism]] that is united in critique of foundationalism.<ref>{{Citation |last=Rorty |first=Richard |title=Wittgenstein, Heidegger, and the reification of language |date=1993 |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/cambridge-companion-to-heidegger/wittgenstein-heidegger-and-the-reification-of-language/9678EE30FC5FD89BD254AAE72730D0BF |work=The Cambridge Companion to Heidegger |pages=337β357 |editor-last=Guignon |editor-first=Charles |access-date=2023-03-09 |series=Cambridge Companions to Philosophy |place=Cambridge |publisher=Cambridge University Press |doi=10.1017/ccol0521385709.014 |isbn=978-1-139-00051-2}}</ref>
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to Niidae Wiki may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see
Encyclopedia:Copyrights
for details).
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Search
Search
Editing
Foundationalism
(section)
Add topic