Text 1: Epistemologist Dr. Mary Stone defends foundationalism. "Knowledge rests on basic beliefs that don't require further justification," Stone argues. "Without foundational beliefs, justification leads to infinite regress. Self-evident truths ground the structure."
Text 2: Coherentist Dr. David Park rejects foundations. "No belief is immune to revision," Park contends. "What seems self-evident can be questioned. Justification comes from coherence among beliefs, not privileged foundations."
What is the fundamental disagreement between Stone and Park about justification?
Whether beliefs exist
Whether justification requires privileged foundational beliefs or emerges from systematic coherence
Whether knowledge is possible
Whether revision ever occurs
Correct Answer: B
Choice B is the correct answer. Stone says justification ends at self-evident foundations. Park says justification emerges from coherence without privileged stopping points. Architecture of justification is what they disagree about.
- Evidence: Stone: basic beliefs; Park: coherence among beliefs.
- Reasoning: Different structures of epistemic support.
- Conclusion: Foundation vs. coherence is the core dispute.
Choice A is incorrect because both accept beliefs exist. Choice C is incorrect because both aim to explain knowledge. Choice D is incorrect because both accept beliefs can change.