On Susan Haack's Epistemology

Foundationalism and Coherentism are the most contemporary theory of epistemic justification.The debate between them constitutes one of the main lines of contemporary epistemology.foundationalism advocates distinguishing between basic beliefs and derived beliefs.The justification of basic beliefs does not depend on any other beliefs,but derived beliefs must be supported by one or more basic beliefs.Therefore,foundationalism regards justification as one-directional.coherentism argues that the justification of a belief depends on the coherence between beliefs.justification is something that is only related to beliefs and has nothing to do with the outside world.There are faced two objections to the foundationalism,the one-directional structure of justification is unreasonable,and the second is the source of the basic belief itself.The problem with coherence theory is that it leads to the alienation of beliefs from the world,that is,the justification of beliefs has nothing to do with the world itself.On the basis of solving the disputes between foundationalism and coherentism,a contemporary female philosopher,Susan haack proposed an intermediate theoryfoundherentism.The theory argues that the experience of a subject not only produces corresponding empirical beliefs,but also supports the justification of the belief.But this empirical belief does not have a privileged position.Therefore,the justification structure between beliefs is not one-directional,but multi-directional.Any belief in a set of beliefs,its justification can come from any belief.This paper mainly introduces and analyzes Haack's foundherentism,reveals its problems and proposes amendments from the perspective of virtue epistemology,and advocating a virtue foundherentism.This paper is divided into five parts: introduction,foundationalism and coherentism analysis,Haack's foundherentism,the dilemma and outlet of foundherentism,and the role of foundherentism in scientific interpretation.Introduced as follows:Chapter One Introduction.This chapter mainly introduces the background and research significance of this paper.The background of the topic introduces the origin of the justification problem in contemporary epistemology and the regress problem faced.foundationalism and coherentism are two kinds of justification theories to solve the regress problem.foundationalism advocates that there are certain basic beliefs(experience itself or axioms,etc.)that do not need to be derived from other beliefs.They are self-justified.Therefore,the derived beliefs can terminate the regress chain.The problem with foundationalism is where the basic beliefs come from.coherentism advocates the set of beliefs as a whole,and a single belief needs to justify each other through the mutual support relationship between the various beliefs in the set.Therefore,it can terminate the regress problem.In the second chapter,foundationalism and coherentism analysis,foundationalism has the following types: empirical foundationalism,extrinsic foundationalism and selfjustificatory foundationalism,stronger foundationalism,weaker foundationalism and so on.coherentism is divided into uncompromising coherentism,moderated,weighted coherentism and moderated,degree-of-embedding coherentism.Haack analyzes the types and variants of foundationalism and coherentism one by one,revealing their respective flaws and how to move their rival toward foundherentism.The third chapter is Haack's foundherentism.The theory is between foundationalism and coherentism.It not only allows experience and justification to be related,but also allows universal mutual support between beliefs.Haack's foundherentism begins with a two-aspect,state-content exploration.by three steps,A believes in the extent to how p is justification.Haack also presented three dimensions of good evidence: supportiveness,independent security,and comprehensiveness.To illustrate vividly,We introduced Haack's crossword puzzle model.Haack uses this model to illustrate the structure of evidence.Finally,Haack believes that justification is an indication of truth,and that the criteria that satisfies foundherentism is truthindicative.In other words,the justification is truth-indicatve.The fourth chapter is the dilemma and outlet of foundherentism.There are two objections to foundherentism.Is foundherentism a foundationalism? Second,does foundherentism really reveal the role of experience in justification? This paper mainly responds to the above,and amends it from the perspective of Sosa's virtue epistemology,expounding the basic ideas of virtue foundherentism.Because Haack's crossword puzzle modell is flawed,this chapter also attempts to replace it with a stone arch model,clarifying the structure of evidence,especially highlighting the overall characteristics of the evidence.The fifth chapter is the role of foundherentism in scientific interpretation.On the basis of resolving the dispute between old deferentialism and new cynicism,Haack proposed a critical common-sensism.This paper starts with the crossword puzzle model,and uses this model to compare the scientific evidence to explore the practical application value of foundherentism in scientific interpretation.Finally,the crossword puzzle model and the stone arch model are compared to explore their advantages and disadvantages in scientific interpretation,in order to guide practice.