(May 14, 2014 at 7:48 pm)bennyboy Wrote:(May 14, 2014 at 7:35 pm)Tea Earl Grey Hot Wrote: They serve as evidence to myself which is all that matters in a discussion of "how does one know things" (versus "how does one convince others of things.")Experiences in and of themselves only serve as evidence of those experiences. They are not a good source of evidence for underlying truth. For example, you can know exactly what it's like to have a certain kind of religious experience-- but that does not serve as evidence that God exists.
Evidentialism is a theory of justification, not knowledge. It seeks only to provide one framework for the question "is my belief justified". Whether that belief corresponds to underlying truth is a different kettle of fish.
