Full Idea
Contemporary foundationalists are seldom of the strong Cartesian variety: they do not insist that basic beliefs be absolutely certain. They also tend to allow that coherence can enhance justification.
Gist of Idea
Modern foundationalists say basic beliefs are fallible, and coherence is relevant
Source
James Van Cleve (Why coherence is not enough [2005], III)
Book Reference
'Contemporary Debates in Epistemology', ed/tr. Steup,M/Sosa,E [Blackwell 2005], p.175
A Reaction
It strikes me that they have got onto a slippery slope. How certain are the basic beliefs? How do you evaluate their certainty? Could incoherence in their implications undermine them? Skyscrapers need perfect foundations.