Detalhes bibliográficos
| Ano de defesa: |
2013 |
| Autor(a) principal: |
Etcheverry, Kátia Martins
 |
| Orientador(a): |
Almeida, Cláudio Gonçalves de
|
| Banca de defesa: |
Não Informado pela instituição |
| Tipo de documento: |
Tese
|
| Tipo de acesso: |
Acesso aberto |
| Idioma: |
por |
| Instituição de defesa: |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul
|
| Programa de Pós-Graduação: |
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Filosofia
|
| Departamento: |
Faculdade de Filosofia e Ciências Humanas
|
| País: |
BR
|
| Palavras-chave em Português: |
|
| Área do conhecimento CNPq: |
|
| Link de acesso: |
http://tede2.pucrs.br/tede2/handle/tede/2918
|
Resumo: |
This essay is about the neoclassical account of foundational justification. According to Internalist Foundationalism, in epistemology, if our ordinary beliefs about the world around us are to be rationally justified, the chain of inferential justification must terminate in beliefs that are justified noninferentially, and the subject must be aware of the justifying features of the experiential states, that are the most plausible candidates for ending the regress of justification. There is no agreement among Foundationalists at to the right sort of justification the foundational beliefs have to possess. The Neoclassical Foundationalist claims that only a foundation that is certain can provide the basis for empirical knowledge. A defense of this view requires an account of justification that can face both Sellars and Bergmann s dilemmas, showing how foundational beliefs can be noninferentially and infallibly justified, satisfying the internalist conditions. In this essay we consider in detail the most representative internalist infallibilist theories of foundational justification in order to introduce our thesis that they share a common basis and can respond in a common way to the challenges against their views |
