The following text is from an epistemology article.
Infinitism proposes that justification requires an infinite chain of reasons, each supported by further reasons without end. Unlike foundationalism (basic beliefs need no support) or coherentism (mutual support suffices), infinitism embraces regress without conclusion. Critics question whether infinite chains can genuinely confer justification and whether finite minds can possess infinite reason chains. Infinitists respond by distinguishing dispositional from occurrent beliefs.
What is the main purpose of the text?
To survey major theories of justification including an unconventional option
To prove that infinitely long arguments are impossible
To provide mathematical proofs about infinity
To compare epistemological traditions across cultures
Correct Answer: A
Choice A is the best answer. The text surveys foundationalism, coherentism, and the unconventional infinitism, noting criticisms and responses.
- Evidence: The text surveys: "Unlike foundationalism... or coherentism... infinitism embraces regress." It notes criticisms: "Critics question whether infinite chains can genuinely confer justification." It notes responses: "Infinitists respond by distinguishing dispositional from occurrent beliefs."
- Reasoning: The passage provides a landscape of justification theories, including an unusual one.
- Conclusion: The purpose is to survey theories including an unconventional option.
💡 Strategy: Summarize: Foundation, Coherence, or Infinite regress? All have issues.
Choice B is incorrect because infinitism is presented as viable. Choice C is incorrect because math proofs aren't given. Choice D is incorrect because cultures aren't compared.