You are not currently logged in.
Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:
If you need an accessible version of this item please contact JSTOR User Support
Preview not available
This paper critically evaluates the regress argument for infinitism. The dialectic is essentially this. Peter Klein argues that only an infinitist can, without being dogmatic, enhance the credibility of a questioned non-evident proposition. In response, I demonstrate that a foundationalist can do this equally well. Furthermore, I explain how foundationalism can provide for infinite chains of justification. I conclude that the regress argument for infinitism should not convince us.
Synthese © 2009 Springer