IB Philosophy 3.2.3 Theories of Justification Notes

What Is Justification?

1. Topic 3.2.1 examined scepticismand the challenges it poses to knowledge, and topic 3.2.2 explored theories of perceptionthat determine how reliably we access the external world. This final topic in the Problems of Knowledge sub-theme addresses the third conditionof the justified true belief definition: justification.
2. What makes a belief justifiedrather than merely a lucky guess?
3. The IB syllabus asks two questions: "What do we mean by justification?" and "How do we assesswhether a belief is justified or unjustified?" These questions matter because justification is what separates knowledge from mere true opinion.
4. As discussed in 3.1.1, you can believe something true by accident. Justification is the condition that ensures your belief is held for the right reasons.
5. Justification can be understood in terms of reasons: a belief is justified if the believer can provide adequate reasons for holding it. But this raises the regress problem(introduced in 3.2.1): every reason must itself be supported by a further reason, leading to an infinite chain, a circle, or an unjustified starting point.
6. The major theories of justification are, in large part, different responses to the regress problem.

Internalism and Externalism

1. A fundamental distinction in the philosophy of justification is between internalismand externalism. This distinction, required by the IB syllabus, concerns whether the factors that justify a belief must be accessible to the believeror whether they can be externalto the believer's awareness.
2. Internalismholds that justification depends on factors that are internal to the believer's perspective: the reasons, evidence, and reflections that the believer can access through introspection. On this view, a belief is justified only if the believer can identifythe grounds for holding it.
3. If you cannot explain why you believe something, your belief is not justified, even if it happens to be true.
4. Externalismholds that justification depends on factors that may be external to the believer's awareness. A belief can be justified by a reliable cognitive process (such as normal visual perception) even if the believer cannot articulate why the process is reliable.
5. What matters is not the believer's self-knowledgebut the objective reliabilityof the process that produced the belief.
6. The internalism-externalism debate connects to 3.1.1's discussion of self-knowledge: internalism assumes that we have privileged accessto our own reasons for belief, while externalism allows that the justification of our beliefs may exceed our awareness. This connects to Bhartrhari's pratibha(discussed in 3.1.1), which recognises a form of understanding that precedes explicit articulation.
7. The overarching Unit 3 question, "What is the relationship between knowledge and certainty?", is central here. Internalists tend toward higher standardsof justification (you must be able to articulate your reasons), which makes knowledge harder to attain.
8. Externalists are more permissive: knowledge is available wherever reliable processes operate, even if the believer cannot reflect on those processes.
9. The question of justification also connects to 3.1.2 (Truth): justification is not the same as truth, but its purpose is to make truth-trackingmore likely. A justified belief is one held in a way that makes it probablethat the belief is true, even though probability falls short of certainty.
10. For IB students, understanding the internalism-externalism distinction is essential because it structures all subsequent debate about justification. The key exam skill is the ability to classifydifferent theories as internalist or externalist and to evaluatethe implications of each approach for the scope and limits of knowledge.

Foundationalism and Coherentism

1. Foundationalismand coherentismare the two classical responses to the regress problem(introduced in 3.2.1). Both are internalisttheories: they explain justification in terms of the relationships between the believer's own beliefs.
2. The IB syllabus requires engagement with both foundationalism and coherentismas systematic responses to the regress problem.
3. Foundationalismholds that the regress of justification terminates in basic beliefs: beliefs that are justified without needing support from other beliefs. These basic beliefs serve as the foundationupon which all other knowledge is built.
4. Non-basic beliefs are justified by their inferential connectionto basic beliefs.