Foundationalist account of Knowledge refers to theories and perspectives that philosophers use in justifying the authenticity and the truthfulness of knowledge. These theories seek to differentiate between what knowledge is and what it is not. In making these justifications on what a person can justify as knowledge, various philosophers came up with arguments to support their course. Some of the outstanding philosophers that dealt with this debate include, John Locke, Kant, Hume and René Descartes. Descartes argued that foundational knowledge is just but an infallible belief in an idea and its end. Descartes used the Non-inferential Justification as Infallible Belief on the basis that knowledge can only be made to be knowledge through elimination of a belief that is false (Smith 211). In his arguments, Descartes argues that knowledge would only be believed to its end when the false things or bit about that knowledge does not exist. In this respect, Descartes has it that doubt can serve as a tool in justifying what was thought to be knowledge to be one. It is apparently clear from this discussion that various philosophers define knowledge according to their own understanding, which often creates controversies but calls for accommodation of each other’s views.
Hume looks at foundationalist knowledge justification from a perspective he calls, epistemic conservatism. Hume argues that, knowledge can only be determined or justified once it is tested with the older believes of the past of an individual. In launching his argument, Hume has it that human beings are prone to change. He further argues that, knowledge would remain to be if it challenges the status quo and would not easily allow an individual to get back to a different belief he had earlier. Hume tries to bring out a difference between knowledge and “appearings” or “seemings”, which he sees to be but a product of sceptical attack, which would always make one revert to past beliefs (Audi 38).
Kant has his argument on foundational knowledge built on arguments for or against priori knowledge. In his arguments, Kant believes that knowledge is not about past occurrences and beliefs that one had. It is about the current beliefs and their applicability to real life situation in the existing society (Summerfield 13). Kant demonstrates his arguments through reference to fields such as Mathematics and ethics. He argues that he did not depend on experience to give humanity knowledge. Kant argues that knowledge is empirical only if an alternative that is not empirical is known to exist. John Locke looked at ideas based on the reflection of truthfulness or falsehood that comes from the idea. In this argument, Locke has is that ideas may not have the truth in themselves but may be seen as truth or false based on how they refer to themselves. According to Locke, truthfulness of an idea may be interpreted based on the relation between the external world, which is independent, and the idea at hand (Rockmore 126).
In looking at the four philosophers, we find that justifying an idea to be knowledge is something that would always remain controversial. Even as, every philosopher from Descartes’, Kant, Locke and Hume try to pull to their sides, all their theories and ways of looking at epistemology have deficiencies. There is no theory in itself that can stand without any deficiencies as to the determination of the truthfulness of an idea and the justification of knowledge. There are various lessons that one can realize from the immense efforts by the philosophers. First, it is important to appreciate the effort of other people rather than scolding their failures. It is also important to appreciate the fact that people should learn to defend the ideas they believe in rather than backstabbing the ideas of other people. This promotes knowledge development in the society.
Works Cited
Summerfield, Donna. Modest a Priori Knowledge, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, New York, NY: International Phenomenological Society
Audi, Robert. Epistemology: A Contemporary Introduction to the Theory of Knowledge. California, CA: London: Taylor & Francis, 2010. Print
Rockmore, Tom. On Foundationalism: A Strategy for Metaphysical Realism. London: Rowman & Littlefield, 2004. Print
Smith, Leslie. Necessary Knowledge: Piagetian Perspectives on Constructivism. Canberra: Psychology Press, 1993. Print.
