justification ↔ Hypothesis

Relations (1)

related 2.32 — strongly supporting 4 facts

The concepts are related because explanatory and reliability coherentism define the conditions under which a subject possesses justification for believing a hypothesis (H), as detailed in [1], [2], [3], and [4].

Facts (4)

Sources

Epistemology - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy plato.stanford.edu Matthias Steup, Ram Neta · Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy 4 facts

claimExplanatory coherentism accounts for a lack of justification by noting that if an alternative explanation for an experience (E) is as good as or better than the hypothesis (H), the subject is not justified in believing (H).

claimAccording to explanatory coherentism, the justification for a belief (H) is structured by two beliefs: (1) the subject has a visual experience (E) of a hat looking blue, and (2) the subject's experience (E) is best explained by the assumption that the hypothesis (H) is true.

claimReliability coherentism posits that for a subject to be justified in believing a hypothesis (H), the subject need not believe anything about the reliability of the belief's origin, but must have justification for believing that the belief's origin is reliable, specifically by having justification for propositions (1) and (3).

claimExplanatory coherentism posits that for a subject to be justified in believing a hypothesis (H), it is not necessary that the subject actually believes the supporting propositions (1) and (2), but it is necessary that the subject has justification for believing (1) and (2).