Knowledge, Truth, Belief - Assignment Example

Internalism and Externalism Chisholm believes that internal justification is indispensable there lacks alternatives to internalism. This is true for most cases of epistemic justification. The procedure we follow in arriving at a justification does not have weight. The imperative thing is true belief, and not the procedure. If a certain belief is true, then the process that led to the development of the belief is not essential. The important thing is that the process produced a true belief. Therefore, epistemic justification should not be defined by references to a reliable process.

One should try to understand the belief forming process that one is following. One should then seek out processes that are reliable. In all these, we see that any explications, even externalist explications, revolve around and make use of the internalist concepts (Chisholm 295).Goldman is an externalist, by explaining his position in justification after facts. He believes that the justification status of a certain belief is a function of the processes’ reliability. This is an externalistic approach.

He disputes Chisholm’ internalist approach that justification status of a certain belief is something that the cognizer determines or is able to know. It is not necessary for the cognizer to know that a certain belief is justified. Rather, it is the reliability of the process that is important; that is, justifying your action after tested/reliable facts.There is a need for a merger between the two approaches. Internalism and externalism on their own provide unsatisfactory responses in answering the deepest epistemological issues (Laurence 8).

For a belief to be justified, it is important to possess internal belief. However, it is imperative to base this internal belief on reliable processes. Hence, justification should not solely be determined by factors which are internal to person. For a proper response to epistemological issues, a hybrid of the two systems should be sought.Works CitedLaurence, BonJour. Epistemic Justification: Internalism vs. Externalism. NY: Wiley, 2003. Print.Chisholm, Roderick. “The indispensability of internal justification”.

Synthese, 74.3 (1988): 285-296.