Talk:Evidentialism

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Philosophy: Epistemology Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated task forces: /  Epistemology

Andries, you added:

In other words, evidentialism says that one shouldn't be certain about the truth of a proposition if one can't be certain of it and that one shouldn't doubt about its truth if the proposition has been proven to be true or untrue.

I wonder if this is part of the definition, or if it is some kind of conclusion. Putting this conclusion parallel to the definition makes it appear to be an attempt to say the same thing "in other words", which I'm not sure is accurate. Rather, it might more be correct to say,

In other words, knowledge is only as sound as the evidence upon which it is founded.

What do you think? Does this summarize the point you were trying to express, sufficiently? Mkmcconn — 23:05, 9 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Mkmcconn, that was how I had understood the definition of evidentialism but if you think it is inaccurate then please correct it. I added it because I don't like unnecessarily abstract definitions. Andries 23:30, 9 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I substituted my suggestion. I hope that fits your intention. Mkmcconn — 00:21, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)