Epistemic Justification

Internalism vs. Externalism, Foundations vs. Virtues

Browse Return to Previous Page       Related Subjects All Subjects Philosophy

by Laurence BonJour and Ernest Sosa

Blackwell Publishers

Due/Published May 2003, 248 pages, paper

ISBN 0631182845

Ever since Plato it has been thought that one has knowledge only if one has a belief, one's belief hits the mark of truth, and that it does so with adequate justification. The issues debated by Laurence BonJour and Ernest Sosa concern mostly the nature and conditions of such epistemic justification, and its place in our understanding of human knowledge. BonJour defends a traditional, internalist epistemology, according to which epistemic justification derives from the subject's taking what is given to his conscious awareness, and accepting claims or steps of reasoning on an a priori basis. Sosa defends an externalist virtue epistemology. He rejects the sort of internalist foundationalism favored by BonJour, while agreeing to put aside issues of knowledge and its conditions, in order to focus on the issue of epistemic, rational justification. He agrees that a belief's having a reliable source is not enough to render it thus justified. The two comprehensive positions that are the antagonists in this debate represent syntheses of the main views that have been proposed with regard to the nature of epistemic justification.

Series: Great Debates in Philosophy