DePaul (philosophy, U. of Notre Dame) uses an analogy with Iceland while defending the continued acceptance of foundationalism that no one attacks countries which are not powerful; foundationalism is under attack, it therefore must still be prevalent in his introduction to this short but pithy group of essays. The writers Richard Fumerton, Laurence BonJour, John Pollock and Alvin Plantinga (academics in philosophy and religious studies) defend epistemic foundationalism, arguing that there are some beliefs that are justified and are not themselves justified by any further beliefs. Annotation c. Book News, Inc., Portland, OR (booknews.com)
The contributions in this volume make an important effort to resurrect a rather old fashioned form of foundationalism. They defend the position that there are some beliefs that are justified, and are not themselves justified by any further beliefs. This epistemic foundationalism has been the subject of rigorous attack by a wide range of theorists in recent years, leading to the impression that foundationalism is a thing of the past. DePaul argues that it is precisely the volume and virulence of the assaults which points directly to the strength and coherence of the position.
