Talk:Theory of justification
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the Philosophy WikiProject, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy and the history of ideas. Please read the instructions and standards for writing and maintaining philosophy articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. | |
Parts of this article are derived from Larry's Text. (see User:Larry Sanger/Larry's Text)
Larry, I am trying to allow for distinctions between internalism and externalism, and set up an article on Getter problems. I can't do this without radically changing the second half of this article, since externalists generally frame their theories as a critique of the JTB theory of knowledge.
I also think some historical reference to Plato and the notion that knowledge is belief plus logos, or reasons, found in the Thaetetus, would be helpful here.
Anyway, I just wanted to put you on notice that I'm planning to radically alter the rest of this text, so that it only explains one view -- the normative internalist view of justification. I think that's fair, since that is how the term is generally used. I think we can and should cover other views, but that we ought to do it on other pages.
If you have objections to this, please let me know, so I don't waste my time writing something you are going to delete out of hand. MRC
An attempt to de-larryify the page. Added heading structure. Not happy with the three sugestions for th esort of thing that can be a justifier - does anyone know who proposes each? Copyedit needed. Banno 00:39, Apr 12, 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Lots of writers use "warrant"
This mystifies me. "Stephen Pepper (1942), in his 'world hypothesis' theory of the history of epistemology, uses the term warrant."
Pepper, a red link yet, is given special status, which seems to imply that use of the term "warrant" in this context is otherwise rare. It isn't. It would've been easy to come up with (blue link) philosophers names who also use warrant. Like Alvin Plantinga, just for example. Unless we want to make a really long list, though, why is Pepper here? --Christofurio 21:38, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
It looks to me like the following phrase is grammatically incorrect. It is about 4 lines down from the top.
"If A makes a claim, and B the casts"
