more from this thinker
|
more from this text
Single Idea 21502
[filed under theme 13. Knowledge Criteria / B. Internal Justification / 5. Coherentism / c. Coherentism critique
]
Full Idea
The Input Objection says a pure coherence theory would seem to allow that a system of beliefs be justified in spite of being utterly out of contact with the world it purports to describe, so long as it is, to a sufficient extent, coherent.
Gist of Idea
A purely coherent theory cannot be true of the world without some contact with the world
Source
Erik J. Olsson (Against Coherence [2005], 4.1)
Book Ref
Olsson,Erik J.: 'Against Coherence' [OUP 2008], p.62
A Reaction
Olson seems impressed by this objection, but I don't see how a system could be coherently about the world if it had no known contact with the world. Olson seems to ignore meta-coherence, which evaluates the status of the system being studied.
The
23 ideas
with the same theme
[criticisms of the coherentist view]:
|
23206
|
Schematic minds think thoughts are truer if they slot into a scheme
[Nietzsche]
|
|
21497
|
If undetailed, 'coherence' is just a vague words that covers all possible arguments
[Ewing]
|
|
6873
|
Coherent justification seems to require retrieving all our beliefs simultaneously
[Goldman]
|
|
8879
|
Fully comprehensive beliefs may not be knowledge
[Sosa]
|
|
8813
|
If we have to appeal explicitly to epistemic norms, that will produce an infinite regress
[Pollock]
|
|
8891
|
My incoherent beliefs about art should not undermine my very coherent beliefs about physics
[Bonjour]
|
|
8892
|
Coherence seems to justify empirical beliefs about externals when there is no external input
[Bonjour]
|
|
8894
|
Coherentists must give a reason why coherent justification is likely to lead to the truth
[Bonjour]
|
|
3590
|
Coherence theory must give a foundational status to coherence itself
[Williams,M]
|
|
3589
|
Why should diverse parts of our knowledge be connected?
[Williams,M]
|
|
2732
|
Maths may be consistent with observations, but not coherent
[Audi,R]
|
|
2733
|
It is very hard to show how much coherence is needed for justification
[Audi,R]
|
|
2734
|
A consistent madman could have a very coherent belief system
[Audi,R]
|
|
6354
|
Coherence theories fail, because they can't accommodate perception as the basis of knowledge
[Pollock/Cruz]
|
|
6367
|
Coherence theories isolate justification from the world
[Pollock/Cruz]
|
|
10340
|
Individualistic coherentism lacks access to all of my beliefs, or critical judgement of my assessment
[Kusch]
|
|
10345
|
Individual coherentism cannot generate the necessary normativity
[Kusch]
|
|
7297
|
My justifications might be very coherent, but totally unconnected to the world
[Cardinal/Hayward/Jones]
|
|
21496
|
Mere agreement of testimonies is not enough to make truth very likely
[Olsson]
|
|
21499
|
Coherence is only needed if the information sources are not fully reliable
[Olsson]
|
|
21502
|
A purely coherent theory cannot be true of the world without some contact with the world
[Olsson]
|
|
21512
|
Extending a system makes it less probable, so extending coherence can't make it more probable
[Olsson]
|
|
19721
|
Coherence theories struggle with the role of experience
[Mittag]
|