science

Infallibilism

Infallibilism is a science topic covered in the lgStudy science library. This page brings together a partial reference excerpt, illustrations, worked examples, real-world applications and a short study plan, so you can understand Infallibilism rather than just read about it. In short: Infallibilism is the epistemological view that propositional knowledge is incompatible with the possibility of being wrong. Definition In philosophy, infallibilism (sometimes called "epistemic infallibilism") is the view that knowing the truth of a proposition is incompatible with there being any possibility that the proposition could be false.

Key takeaways

Infallibilism belongs to science; place it in that map before memorising details.
Learn the definition first, then one example that makes the definition concrete.
Connect Infallibilism to a quantity you can measure, compute or draw — that is where exam questions come from.
Reproduce the core statement of Infallibilism from memory before moving on to harder problems.

Reference excerpt

Infallibilism is the epistemological view that propositional knowledge is incompatible with the possibility of being wrong.

Definition In philosophy, infallibilism (sometimes called "epistemic infallibilism") is the view that knowing the truth of a proposition is incompatible with there being any possibility that the proposition could be false. This is typically understood as indicating that for a belief to count as knowledge, one's evidence or justification must provide one with such strong grounds that the belief must be true, or equivalently, that it is completely impossible for it to be false. The infallibility of such a belief may also mean that it cannot even be doubted. Infallibilism should not be confused with the view that a proposition P must be true in order for someone to know that P. Instead, the infallibilist holds that a person who knows P could not have all of the same evidence (or justification) that one currently has if P were false, and therefore that one's evidence/justification offers a guarantee of the truth of P. Thus, in cases where a person could have held the same true belief P with the same level of evidence (or justification) and still been wrong, the infallibilist holds that the person does not know P. The infallibilist defines knowledge in the following way: A person (henceforth S) knows that a proposition (henceforth P) is true if and only if:

P is true. S believes that P is true. S is justified in their belief that P is true. S's justification guarantees the truth of P. According to the infallibilist, fallible beliefs may be rationally justified, but they do not rise to the level of knowledge unless their truth is absolutely certain given one's evidence. The contrary view to infallibilism, known as fallibilism, is the position that a justified true belief may be considered knowledge even if one's evidence does not guarantee its truth, or even if one can rationally doubt it given one's current evidence. Infallibilism should not be confused with skepticism, which is the view that knowledge is unattainable for rational human beings. While numerous critics of infallibilism claim that defining knowledge according to such high standards collapses into epistemic skepticism, many proponents of infallibilism (although not all) deny that this is the case.

History René Descartes, an early proponent of infallibilism, argued, "my reason convinces me that I ought not the less carefully to withhold belief from what is not entirely certain and indubitable, than from what is manifestly false".

Contemporary infallibilism Infallibilism is rejected by most contemporary epistemologists, who generally accept that one can have knowledge based on fallible justification. Baron Reed has provided an account of the reasons why infallibilism is so widely regarded as untenable today. Broad consensus notwithstanding, some contemporary philosophers have presented arguments in defense of infallibilism and have therefore come to reject fallibilism. For instance, Mark Kaplan defends such a view in a 2006 paper entitled "If You Know You Can't Be Wrong". Other notable contemporary proponents of infallibilism include Andrew Moon, Julien Dutant, and Matthew Benton.

Worked examples

Example 1 — a first encounter with Infallibilism

Start with the simplest possible case. Write down what Infallibilism claims or describes in one sentence, then invent the smallest concrete situation in which that sentence is true. In science, the smallest case is usually a single object, a single equation or a single measurement. Check that every symbol or term in your sentence has a meaning in that case.

Example 2 — changing one variable

Take the situation from Example 1 and change exactly one quantity: double it, halve it, or set it to zero. Predict what should happen to Infallibilism before you calculate. Comparing your prediction with the result is the fastest way to find out whether you understand the idea or only the words.

Example 3 — an exam-style question

Typical questions about Infallibilism ask you to (a) state it precisely, (b) apply it to given data, and (c) explain a limitation. Practise writing all three answers in under five minutes; the third part is what separates a full-mark answer from an average one.

Applications of Infallibilism

In research: Infallibilism appears in science research whenever the underlying quantities have to be modelled precisely. Papers usually cite it as a starting assumption and then explore where it breaks down.
In technology and industry: Engineering practice reuses Infallibilism in design rules, simulations and safety margins. Knowing the idea lets you read a specification sheet and understand why the numbers look the way they do.
In the classroom: Infallibilism is common in secondary-school and first-year university syllabi. It links to neighbouring topics Belief, Theories of justification, so understanding it makes those chapters shorter.
In everyday life: Look for Infallibilism outside the textbook — in sport, cooking, traffic, electronics or the sky above you. An example you found yourself is remembered far longer than one you were given.

Affiliate

Preply — study more efficiently by working with a personal tutor. 50% off.

How to study Infallibilism in 20 minutes

Read the reference excerpt below once, without taking notes.
Close the page and write down what Infallibilism means in your own words.
Compare your version with the excerpt and mark what you missed.
Work through the three examples above with pen and paper.
Explain Infallibilism out loud to somebody else — or to Teacher Smith in the lgStudy chat.

Frequently asked questions

What is Infallibilism in simple terms?

Infallibilism is the epistemological view that propositional knowledge is incompatible with the possibility of being wrong. Definition In philosophy, infallibilism (sometimes called "epistemic infallibilism") is the view that knowing the truth of a proposition is incompatible with there being any p…

Why does Infallibilism matter?

Because it connects several science ideas at once: it gives you a definition you can apply, a quantity you can calculate, and a way to check whether a result is plausible.

How should I study Infallibilism?

Read the excerpt, restate it from memory, then work through the examples and applications listed on this page. The five-step study plan above takes about twenty minutes.

What does this page cover?

It gives you a compact reference excerpt plus original lgStudy explanations, examples, applications and study material on Infallibilism.