1.4.5 Responses to scepticism:

• What is scepticism in philosophy?

  Uncertainty about absolute knowledge
• The dream argument suggests we cannot be certain we are not dreaming
• The infinite regress in the regress argument implies that true knowledge is impossible because:

  1️⃣ Every belief requires justification

  2️⃣ The justification requires further justification

  3️⃣ This process continues infinitely

  4️⃣ No belief can be ultimately justified
• What are the indubitable foundations of knowledge in Foundationalism?

  Self-evident beliefs
• Foundationalism argues that all beliefs are equally justified.

  False
• What does the demon argument propose about our beliefs?

  They could be deceived
• Match the responses to scepticism with their definitions:

  Foundationalism ↔️ Beliefs are justified if built on self-evident foundations

  Coherentism ↔️ Beliefs are justified if they cohere with other beliefs
• What is coherentism's response to scepticism?

  Beliefs justified through coherence
• What is the role of the web of beliefs in Coherentism?

  Justifying individual beliefs
• Coherentists believe a belief can be justified if it fits logically with our overall web of beliefs
• What do coherentists believe about indubitable foundations?

  They are not required
• Foundationalists believe foundational beliefs are necessary to overcome scepticism.


  True
• Scepticism argues that absolute knowledge about the world is impossible.

  True
• Coherentism believes beliefs are justified if they cohere with a system of other beliefs.


  True
• The regress argument claims every justified belief relies on further justifications, leading to an infinite regress.


  True
• What is the central argument of coherentism regarding belief justification?

  Coherence with other beliefs
• What is the foundationalist response to scepticism?

  Indubitable foundations for beliefs
• Foundationalists believe that indubitable basic beliefs are necessary to overcome scepticism.

  True
• Fallibilism is less strict about the basis of justification compared to foundationalism.


  True
• Pragmatism favors actionable beliefs over absolute certainty in addressing scepticism.

  True
• How does Coherentism justify beliefs?

  Coherence with other beliefs
• Foundationalism believes all beliefs must be built on empirical evidence.

  False
• Coherentism argues that beliefs are justified if they fit logically with our overall web of beliefs
• Coherentism requires beliefs to be based on indubitable foundations.

  False
• Foundationalism argues that some basic beliefs are self-evident or indubitable.

  True
• How does coherentism justify beliefs?

  Through logical coherence
• What is the common goal of coherentism and foundationalism in response to scepticism?

  Show we can have justified beliefs
• What is foundationalism's response to scepticism?

  Self-evident foundations
• What is the dream argument used in scepticism?

  Uncertainty about being awake
• What is the key difference between foundationalism and coherentism?

  Role of foundations
• Both foundationalism and coherentism aim to address the challenges posed by scepticism.

  True
• What does coherentism emphasize as the basis for belief justification?

  Web of beliefs
• How does coherentism justify beliefs without indubitable foundations?

  Logical coherence
• What is the fallibilist approach to justification?

  Strong evidence, accepts error
• Pragmatism justifies beliefs based on their usefulness and practical outcomes
• Arrange the epistemological views in order of their strictness regarding the basis of justification, from most to least strict:

  1️⃣ Foundationalism

  2️⃣ Coherentism

  3️⃣ Fallibilism

  4️⃣ Pragmatism
• Foundationalism defines justified beliefs as those built upon self-evident foundations
• Foundationalism justifies beliefs by starting from indubitable foundations
• Sceptics often use arguments such as the dream argument and the demon argument to challenge the justification of our beliefs
• Sceptical arguments challenge the possibility of knowledge by undermining the justification