Knowledge Tree
Evidentialism
Also known as: evidentialists
Facts (42)
Sources
Epistemology - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy plato.stanford.edu Dec 14, 2005 10 facts
claimEvidentialism, when combined with the principles of Luminosity and Necessity, functions as an instance of accessibility internalism.
claimEvidentialism, a central issue in religious epistemology, asserts that knowledge requires adequate evidence, which creates a challenge for theists who may lack adequate evidence for God's existence.
claimEvidentialism asserts that a brain-in-a-vat subject is justified in believing they have hands because they are not deceived about their internal evidence, which is defined as the way things appear to them in their experiences.
claimAccording to evidentialism, evidence consists of perceptual, introspective, memorial, and intuitional experiences.
claimEvidentialism, as an internalist theory, posits that a radically deceived subject is misled about the actual state of affairs but remains correct about what they are justified in believing.
claimEvidentialism asserts that whether one is justified in believing a proposition depends on one's evidence regarding that proposition, and that this evidence consists of one's mental states.
claimEvidentialism is classified as an internalist theory because it implies that if two subjects are mentally alike, they possess the same evidence and are therefore justificationally alike, regardless of physical differences.
claimEvidentialism is classified as a form of mentalist internalism because it posits that evidence consists of mental states.
claimEvidentialists argue that a belief cannot be justified unless it is supported by evidence, claiming that beliefs formed reliably but without accompanying experiences qualifying as evidence are not justified.
claimAccording to evidentialism, a subject who is radically deceived is misled regarding the actual state of affairs but is not misled regarding what they are justified in believing.
Epistemology (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy/Fall 2019 Edition) plato.stanford.edu Dec 14, 2005 9 facts
claimAn alternative view to evidentialism suggests that the obligations relevant to assessing whether a belief is justified are those that require one to follow the correct epistemic norms in the pursuit of truth.
claimEvidentialism is an internalist theory of justification, whereas reliabilism is an externalist theory of justification.
claimSome evidentialists define the possession of evidence for believing a proposition p as being in a mental state that represents p as being true.
claimEvidentialists assert that justified beliefs are justified because of the possession of evidence.
claimEarl Conee and Richard Feldman published 'Evidentialism' in the journal Philosophical Studies in 1985.
claimEvidentialism implies that a brain in a vat (Tim*) is correct in believing his beliefs are justified because he is not deceived about his evidence, which is defined as the way things appear to him in his experiences.
claimEvidentialists argue that the obligations relevant to assessing whether a belief is justified are those that arise from the pursuit of truth, specifically that one ought to believe in accordance with one's evidence.
claimEvidentialists categorize perceptual, introspective, memorial, and intuitional experiences as forms of evidence.
claimEvidentialism is typically associated with internalism, while reliabilism is typically associated with externalism.
Naturalized Epistemology - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy plato.stanford.edu Jul 5, 2001 9 facts
claimEvidentialists are committed to the existence of epistemic facts regarding which beliefs are supported by a particular body of evidence.
claimEvidentialism asserts that the natural facts determining whether a belief is justified are facts about the evidence a person possesses for that belief.
claimThe concept of 'evidential support' within evidentialism faces challenges regarding its naturalistic credentials because its connection to scientifically identifiable objects and properties is difficult to ascertain.
claimIf epistemic support facts are natural facts and justification is defined by evidence possessed and epistemic support, then justification is defined in entirely natural terms, removing the need for evidentialists to rely on supervenience to defend naturalism.
claimThe evidential support described in Roderick Chisholm's principle (R) is defeasible, meaning one could possess evidence that they are not really seeing something red despite being appeared to redly.
claimEvidentialism holds that people who possess the same evidence are necessarily justified in believing the same things.
claimEvidentialism defines epistemic justification as a state where a person is justified in believing a proposition at a specific time if and only if the evidence the person possesses at that time supports believing that proposition.
claimSome evidentialists are committed to the existence of fundamental epistemic principles or evidential support relations that differ from deductive or probabilistic relations and cannot be defined by psychological or logical relations.
claimTraditionalists in epistemology often regard epistemic support facts as necessary truths, and this necessity allows evidentialists to endorse the supervenience thesis.
Epistemic Justification – Introduction to Philosophy: Epistemology press.rebus.community 7 facts
claimEvidentialists are typically internalists because they consider evidence to be information that is internal to the mind, as one cannot use information outside the mind in thought.
claimEvidentialists are epistemologists who hold the view that justification is entirely a matter of a person’s evidence.
referenceDaniel M. Mittag authored the entry 'Evidentialism' for The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
claimFor evidentialists, a proposition p is probable for a person if their overall evidence supports p better than not-p, meaning p is more likely to be true than false given the information that person possesses.
claimNotable approaches to explaining the epistemic standard include evidentialism, strong/modest foundationalism, coherentism, explanationism, infinitism, virtue responsibilism, virtue reliabilism, process reliabilism, and proper functionalism.
claimEvidentialists typically agree that epistemic justification is truth-conducive, meaning that a person’s justified beliefs are probably true given the person’s overall evidence.
claimEvidentialists accept the view that epistemic justification is entirely a matter of a person's evidence, where evidence is defined as an indication of truth that can be used in thought.
Epistemology - Wikipedia en.wikipedia.org 4 facts
claimEvidentialism defines a belief as justified if the individual's evidence supports it and the individual holds the belief on the basis of that evidence.
claimEvidentialism is an internalist view asserting that justification depends on the possession of evidence, defined as any information in the individual's mind that supports the belief.
claimEvidentialists analyze justification by asserting that for a belief to be justified, it must rest on adequate evidence.
claimEvidentialists suggest that memories, intuitions, and other beliefs are valid forms of evidence.
Epistemology | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy iep.utm.edu 1 fact
referenceRichard Feldman and Earl Conee present and defend an internalist account of justification in their 1985 paper 'Evidentialism' where a belief is justified or unjustified in virtue of the believer’s evidence.
Social Epistemology - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy plato.stanford.edu Feb 26, 2001 1 fact
referenceJennifer Lackey published 'Credibility and the distribution of epistemic goods' in the 2018 book 'Believing in Accordance with the Evidence: New essays on evidentialism', edited by K. McCain.
Naturalism in Epistemology - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy plato.stanford.edu Jan 8, 2016 1 fact
claimEvidentialism posits that a belief is justified to the degree that it fits the subject's evidence, meaning the possession of evidence is what makes a belief justified.