2025 RationalWiki 'Oregon Plan' Fundraiser

There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff—we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.

Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $10, $20 or whatever you can today with PayPal Logo.png!
Donations so far: $5273.29Goal: $10000

Fallibilism

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Thinking hardly
or hardly thinking?

Philosophy
Icon philosophy.svg
Major trains of thought
The good, the bad,
and the brain fart
Come to think of it

Fallibilism in epistemology is the belief that something can be accepted as true despite lacking irrefutable justification. The term was coined by Charles Sanders Peirce. In some contexts, it may be used to describe the position that knowledge may turn out to be false. Fallibilism was influential to the likes of Karl Popper and Imre Lakatos.

Fallibilism can be understood as addressing the problem of infinite regress. Whenever trying to ascertain the truth, we may always find ourselves in a cycle of asking "why?", the so-called infinite regress. Fallibilism integrates this issue by arguing that all knowledge is uncertain because of the potential for this regress. Rather than rejecting knowledge on these grounds, it accepts the regress as present while still making room for claims to truth. Fallibilism is not the belief that valid knowledge does not require justification. Rather, it's the belief that valid knowledge won't and can't be totally and absolutely justified.

See also[edit]