Final Exam Flashcards
Epistemically justified
If a belief is good within a relevant category of evaluation
Martin’s connection between justification and argument?
for a belief that p to be justified, one must be able to justify that belief/give a good argument for its truth
Examples challenging Martins’ connection between justification and need for arguments
3 year old could have a belief but is unable to justify it, like they saw a deer in the backyard; even if can’t say what it is based on, it’s still justified
1 plus 1 = 2 (we dont’ have a good argument for it, but seems to be true)
General reliability of cognitive faculties
What is the regress/Pyrrhonian problematic?
Caused by Martin’s connection between justification and argument
Seems that P’s being argumentativtively based on Q can confer justification on P only if Q is justified, but this means that fully accounting of rate justification of P will require that we then proceed to give an account of the justification of Q - leads to either infinite chain, circular chain, or chain with a starting point
What are the three options for the regress problem
Infinite chain
Circular chain
Chain w/ starting point
Infinitism implications and objections
Need infinite string of arguments involving different propositions, also would need argument just for infinite number of propositions; maybe impossible
Coherentism implications and objections
Beliefs justified in virtue of being part of a coherent system of beliefs (circular chain insufficient on account of question begging)
Foundationalism implications and objections
Some beliefs are properly basic; they are not justified in virtue of being based on other justified beliefs, but for some other reason; other claims justified in virtue of being conclusion of an inferential chain terminating in proper basic beliefs; do not need inferential support to be justified; criticized for being too dogmatic
Basic belief
A belief that is accepted without being based on other beliefs that one holds, for example “I am seeing a tree”; contrasts with derived beliefs
Properly basic belief
rationally justified and appropriate for a person to accept that belief in a basic way
If she religious beliefs are properly basic, then…
the question of whether religious beliefs are justified will not come down to whether there are good arguments for religious belief
Evidentialism:
justified religious belief must be based on evidence that is,, in principle, publicly available and dialectically effective
Reformed epistimology
religious beliefs could be properly basic, justified without argumentative support
What are two types of non-evidentialism
Reformed epistemology and pragmatism
Examples of religious experience
answered or unanswered prayers
apparent miracles
perceptual experiences (appearance that is relevantly analoguous to sense perception)
experiences of insight (in worship, epiphany, meditaiton)
What does James say on the noetic quality of mystical experience
The insightful character of mystical experiences; unlike mere visual perception, mystical experience purports to bring some sort of cognitive improvement or deeper understanding (deeper significance is appreciate)
Catch with James’ noetic quality of mystical experience
For mystical insight to have philosophical experience, it must be integrated into a theory informed by more standard philosophical reasoning
Contrast between noetic and purely perceptual mystical experiences
Noetic gives you new insights/ways of understanding
Affective rationalism:
Proper affective responses/emotionally engaged experiences can play a crucial role in facilitating rational insight into the plausibility of some position; these insightful experiences could increase rational probability; but still emphasizes rational assessment x
What is the argument with affective rationalism
- appropriate affective response arguably crucial to facilitating isngihtt into moral and value claims
- Traditional theism relies on claims that a good God is responsible of world, so our assessment of theism will depend on worthiness judgments (could a world like ours be worthy of creation by a good god?)
- Cannot assess these claims dispassionately
Example of when affective rationalism comes into handy
Unable to assess power of responsibility theodicy without assessing how valuable mutal responsibility is, and if it is valuable to the level that would warrant God doing that even though it could cause pain
What might Martin-style critiques of experience-based grounds for religious belief imply and then the rejoined?
- Suggest that primary way religious experience might help ground religious belief is by providing material for an inference to the best explanation; but in reality religious experience might give someone a new and meaningful way of shaping the world that shapes the apparent plausibility of religious outlooks
Alston’s perceptual model of experience-based religious belief
There is an apparent perceptual experience of God, and this experience is the justifying ground for belief in the existence of the perceived reality; most beliefs formed by sense perception are justified non-inferentiallly
Alston’s thesis
If God exists, then many religious experiences could be genuinely counted as cases of perceiving god