Coherentism and the symmetry of epistemic support
In a recent paper Tom Stoneham (2007) offered a reductio of coherentism. In this paper I defend Stoneham from a criticism made by Darrell Rowbottom (2007) and I offer two proofs. The first is of an early step in Stoneham’s argument, a step which is not (in my opinion) adequately argued by Stoneham; the second is that holistic coherentism is logically equivalent to the symmetry and quasi-transitivity1 of epistemic support and a condition on justified beliefs. I rebut Rowbottom partly because my proof uses the premiss he is criticising. I offer the proofs because I think the results are a matter of independent interest. For example, Thagard (2000) takes symmetry as an axiom, but perhaps he need not, or perhaps it, together with his view of explanation, commits him to holism. My proofs are independent of the criticisms of Stoneham made by Christoph Jager (2007) and Paul Noordhof (2007). Stoneham’s first premiss is his characterization of coherentism: