A main part of contemporary religious epistemology consists of debates on the problem of validity of evidentialism. Generally contemporary epistemology tends to refuse evidentialism because this view establishes a stricter measure for justification. Most important reaction to this view can be seen in ...
Read More
A main part of contemporary religious epistemology consists of debates on the problem of validity of evidentialism. Generally contemporary epistemology tends to refuse evidentialism because this view establishes a stricter measure for justification. Most important reaction to this view can be seen in well-formed epistemology that takes some religious beliefs and see them not in need to sufficient justification.In this article we argue that: 1. well-formed epistemology can’t solve the charge of arbitrariness; consequently, 2. this view isn’t defensible; and 3. religious beliefs in another sense can be seen foundational: in foundational meaning for knowledge’s whole claim and approaching to truth (refusing the radical skepticism).
