<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Tina-Desiree Berg &#187; Epistemology</title>
	<atom:link href="http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/index.php/category/philosophy/epistemology/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog</link>
	<description>Model. Actress. Philosopher. Whatever.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 Nov 2011 16:11:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Can Foundationalism and Coherence Theory Co-exist? Part Three</title>
		<link>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2010/02/17/can-foundationalism-and-coherence-theory-co-exist-part-three/</link>
		<comments>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2010/02/17/can-foundationalism-and-coherence-theory-co-exist-part-three/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Feb 2010 19:00:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Administrator</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Epistemology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/?p=153</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Please note that this is part three of a three-part discussion Significantly-built into the notion discussed in part two- is the concept that the inferential transmission of our justification does not need to be deductive, but rather can be probabilistic or inductive. Epistemologist Robert Audi, in The Foundationalism-Coherentism Controversy, states, &#8220;Superstructure beliefs may be only [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2010/02/17/can-foundationalism-and-coherence-theory-co-exist-part-three/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Can Foundationalism and Coherence Theory Co-exist? Part Two</title>
		<link>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/10/20/can-foundationalism-and-coherence-theory-co-exist-part-two/</link>
		<comments>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/10/20/can-foundationalism-and-coherence-theory-co-exist-part-two/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Oct 2009 22:36:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Administrator</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Epistemology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/?p=134</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Please note that this is part two of a three part discussion Empirical foundationalist Roderick Chisholm posits in The Myth of the Given that memory and perception are fallible and are some what a matter of coherence. Yet, he also thinks they belong to the class of justified basic beliefs. Why? Because we are human, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/10/20/can-foundationalism-and-coherence-theory-co-exist-part-two/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Can Foundationalism and Coherence Theory Co-exist? Part One</title>
		<link>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/10/15/can-foundationalism-and-coherence-theory-co-exist-part-one/</link>
		<comments>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/10/15/can-foundationalism-and-coherence-theory-co-exist-part-one/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 22:22:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Administrator</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Epistemology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[coherence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[epistemology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fallibalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fallibist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[foundationalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[theory of justification]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[theory of knowledge]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[web of beliefs]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/?p=115</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Please note that this is part one of a three part discussion Foundationalism dictates that knowledge, in the form of justified true belief, must be grounded in immediately evident, or non-inferentially justified basic beliefs. It therefore condones a form of knowledge that is hierarchichal, with epistemic chains arising from these basic beliefs. Coherentism, on the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/10/15/can-foundationalism-and-coherence-theory-co-exist-part-one/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Memory, Perception, and the A Priori define ‘The Given’</title>
		<link>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/02/12/memory-perception-and-the-a-priori-define-%e2%80%98the-given%e2%80%99/</link>
		<comments>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/02/12/memory-perception-and-the-a-priori-define-%e2%80%98the-given%e2%80%99/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Feb 2009 22:42:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Administrator</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Epistemology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Logic and Philosophy of Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[epistemology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[foundationalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[roderick chisholm]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[self justified knowlefge]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the myth of the given]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/02/12/memory-perception-and-the-a-priori-define-%e2%80%98the-given%e2%80%99/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Some skeptical philosophers have wrongly characterized the class of basic beliefs in foundationalist theory known as ‘the given’ as a myth. In response, contemporary epistemologist Roderick Chisholm maintains that some beliefs can be self-justified independently, and that our other non-foundational beliefs, in turn, can be traced back to these basic beliefs. Yet, significantly, what does [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2009/02/12/memory-perception-and-the-a-priori-define-%e2%80%98the-given%e2%80%99/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Epistemology: Should We Ascribe to a Cartesian Ideal?</title>
		<link>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2008/09/18/epistemology-should-we-ascribe-to-a-cartesian-ideal/</link>
		<comments>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2008/09/18/epistemology-should-we-ascribe-to-a-cartesian-ideal/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Sep 2008 19:09:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Administrator</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Epistemology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Logic and Philosophy of Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cartesian ideal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[descartes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[epistemology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[laurence bonjour]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[theory of justification]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[theory of knowledge]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2008/09/18/epistemology-should-we-ascribe-to-a-cartesian-ideal/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The traditional conception of knowledge, originally subscribed to by Plato and forwarded by Descartes, has attempted to define knowledge by separating what constitutes genuine knowledge from what is mere opinion or groundless belief. This definition, which ultimately accepts knowledge to be justified true belief, is presently still being debated and analyzed. Contemporary deliberation on this [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://tinadesireeberg.com/blog/2008/09/18/epistemology-should-we-ascribe-to-a-cartesian-ideal/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.408 seconds -->

