Chisholm's The Problem Of The Criterion

Superior Essays
The problem of the criterion is one of the key issues in epistemology. In The Problem of the Criterion, R.M. Chisholm successfully argues that through the particularist method we can sort the truth from the fallacies. Chisholm manages this by laying out a procedure to sort true beliefs from false beliefs and setting fair conditions on the particularist’s method.
The problem of the criterion, as laid out by Chisholm is “the vicious circle” (1982, p. 61) or descending into an infinite regress. To distinguish true cases of knowledge, Chisholm highlights what Cardinal Mercer has to say on this topic: that “criterion should satisfy three conditions: it should be internal, objective, and immediate” (1982, pg. 63, emphasis in original). Chisholm
…show more content…
Chisholm believes that “there are many things that quite obviously, we do know to be true,” (p. 69) and this is done through following what our senses tell us. Ultimately, “the senses should be regarded as innocent [until proven guilty]” (p. 70). From our senses, our memory, and our intellect we can “begin with particular cases of knowledge and then generalize and formulate criteria of goodness” (p. 70) because of the knowledge we already hold. A person must be self-presenting to trust their senses. To do so, the person must “i. [be] in that state at that time and ii. It is necessarily true that [they are] in that state at that time, then it is evident that [they are] in that state at that time” (p. 72) If these two conditions are not met, the person cannot trust their senses and lacks a foundation for justifying their beliefs. It is important to be able to trust our senses, because as St. Thomas says, “the intellect knows that it possesses the truth by reflecting on itself” (p. …show more content…
One cannot appeal to external sources to determine fact from fiction, and they must have some knowledge of what they believe before they can justify their belief. In dealing with propositions, a direct belief that “is a necessary proposition such that one cannot understand it without thereby knowing that it is true” (p. 73) is known as either “a priori” or an axiom. The two, however, have different conditions for them to be considered as true. For a proposition to be axiomatic it must “i. [be] necessarily true and ii. it is also necessarily true that if the person believes that proposition, the proposition is then evident to [them]” (p. 73). For a proposition to be a priori, either “I. the proposition is one that is axiomatic for the subject at that time, or else ii. the proposition is one such that it is evident to the [person] at that time that the proposition is entailed by a set of propositions that are axiomatic for [them] at that time” (p. 73). For any of these to be followed, these beliefs must be “directly, or immediately evident” (p. 73, emphasis in

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    With this argument, he justifies and exculpates religious faith, saying that no matter whether a person is freely thinking, if they do not know for certain a belief is false, they can believe in it. To know a belief is false…

    • 300 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The argument from ignorance presents difficulties that simply place into question one’s confidence when answering a vague question. Wolgast and Stroud demonstrate the improper context and meaning of the argument, in which we are forced to provide an answer. However, if the answer provided has any correlation with our knowledge obtained through the senses, then it is not a satisfiable answer. Similar to the example that Stroud’s example, if one attempts to provide an answer by using a method (e.g. a test tube)—assuming that knowledge is a necessary condition—then such proof would…

    • 934 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Clifford and James are two philosophers who have contradicting opinions on whether having sufficient evidence is always necessary to believe in something. Where Clifford believes you cannot believe in anything without sufficient evidence, James believes that if the evidence doesn’t point in one way or another, it is justified to believe something based on our will. I will be arguing that James’ side is indeed correct. In James’ paper, he provides concrete evidence as to why his opinion is correct.…

    • 1154 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Sense Certainty Analysis

    • 1653 Words
    • 7 Pages

    What does sense-certainty fail in achieving, and what does this failure mean for epistemology? 2000. December 9th. Sense-certainty is Hegel 's approach to proving that knowledge of the world is not a wholly passive process, he does this through a dialectic from, meaning that the argument moves as a conversation, with hegel presenting an answer to a question, in this case how one can know about the world through consciousness, and then works to show how the answer is wrong in itself, because it holds inconsistencies. This essay will be read as in two parts, first i shall discuss how sense-certainty fails, and then will approach the question of what that means for epistemology.…

    • 1653 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Thus I lean more towards believing in Clifford’s rationalization that we should never fully believe something until we have sufficient evidence. The idea of Epistemology…

    • 1048 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In Core Questions in Philosophy, Sober describes both the Justified True Belief of Knowledge and the Reliability Theory of Knowledge. In this paper, I will examine and compare both theories while each one has differences and similarities, both display the understanding of a fact equally. The Justified True Belief of Knowledge states that for any fact, it must be true or false. Whereas, the Reliability Theory of Knowledge states that the fact cannot be proven to be true or false. Combined, both theories exhibit fewer similarities than differences but the belief that both theories are of equal meaning remains intact.…

    • 1042 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    This includes such things as the images he has in his head and the fact that he has ideas about things other than himself. In the beginning he tries to say away from saying that because he has an idea about a thing it must be true because that would not necessarily be true. That is until he adds in the argument that his ideas about the images or causes of these things may not necessarily be true but that the ideas themselves may actually in fact have existence. Using the idea that his ideas of things and the actual things are not the same things he begins to determine that all of the things he knows may quite possibly be real even not if in the way he originally…

    • 1901 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Meno asks Socrates why knowledge is prized far more than true opinion. To answer this, Socrates tells Meno that true opinion becomes knowledge through thought and recollection of what is true. Thus, true opinion is an unjustified belief while knowledge is a justified belief. So knowledge, in being justified, is more valuable than opinion. But what makes knowledge justified and what is justification?…

    • 967 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Plato's Apology Argument

    • 970 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Every human being has the ability to decide what they believe and what they do not. At a very early age, we develop judgement that allows us to choose whether or not to accept certain claims. These assertions may be tempting, but our reasoning allows us to critically analyze the information with respect to all of our previous knowledge. These claims may be faith based, fact-based, or opinion. Without recognizing it, we take every bit of information we gather, analyze it, and decide whether we accept its validity.…

    • 970 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Falsificationism Karl Popper asserts that the scientific status of a theory is derived from that theories potential for refutation. Theories outlining experimental results that (if observed) could refute the theory are classified as scientific. Theories that lack this content are classified as pseudoscience. Popper uses this distinction to preface his scientific view: falsificationism.…

    • 820 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The Correspondence Theory Over the last century, the world has become a place of everlasting technological advancement. The yearn for knowledge and advancements in academics has brought about an magnificent change in the world. Societies across the globe are rapidly changing and evolving due to new discoveries in the fields of knowledge, but many may ask the question: How can this knowledge be trusted? How is knowledge justified?…

    • 1020 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In the beginning of Al-Ghazzali’s text he mentions questioning self-evident truths. Using the idea of star size to give an example about a self-evident truth, one might think that stars are very small and believe that without any doubt, however others will speculate if that is true or not. This brings up a new idea about self-evident truths; anything that we think is self-evident can now be speculated and/or further analyzed by someone else to find the true meaning. Our senses also contribute to self-evident truths. When you hear, taste, touch, smell, or see something to be “true” you have to immediately consider the uncertainty that goes along with it.…

    • 540 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In the book Science and Religion, two philosophers Alvin Plantinga and Daniel Dennett, share their opposing viewpoints on whether they believe the two are compatible. Plantinga is a Christian and he believes that the two are in fact, compatible. His arguments are based on rationality from a theistic view and how it is not present in a naturalist view. He says, (page 9) "As I argue in Warranted Christian Belief, if theistic belief is true, then very likely it has both rationality and warrant in the basic way, that is, not on the basic of propositional evidence. If theistic belief is true, then very likely there is a cognitive structure something like John Calvin’s sensus divinitatis, an original source of warranted theistic belief.…

    • 853 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Empiricists argue that, to undermine false claims of knowledge, any expectation or belief cannot be classed as knowledge unless tested by experience. This…

    • 1317 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Concepts are not mental images, but not word like entities either. Concepts are mental representations. The dictionary refers to a concept as a general idea or notion that corresponds to some class of entities that consist of characteristics or essential features of class . But it is not just a general idea. They, in fact, shape the way we live, through the way we think, act, judge, and more.…

    • 1376 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays