Dinî Çeşitlilik Bağlamında Epistemik Denkliği Yorumlamak
Analyzing Epistemic Parity in the Context of Religious Diversity

Summary/Abstract: The circumstances of the postmodern world we live in enable us to experience religious diversity more profoundly. However, this diversity also raises a number of theological, philosophical, and epistemological issues. It seems highly unlikely that the question of which religion, among those with differing theological claims, contains the unique truth can be resolved through objective criteria. This is because there is a peer conflict here. The fact that people belonging to different religions share the same epistemic ground yet hold different claims to truth constitutes the basis of this conflict. In fact, it is possible to speak of a general agreement that there can be no objective criteria for determining which religion is correct. However, once this fact is accepted, it is clear that there is no such agreement on what the appropriate epistemic attitude should be. Reformist epistemology, natural theology and the pluralist paradigm offer different solutions to epistemic parity, each with its own challenges. For this reason, David Basinger's considerations on this issue are worth examining. The article focuses first on what Basinger calls the “Basinger Rule,” an epistemic principle, and how it promises to resolve the issues raised by religious diversity. Then, Basinger's emphasis on belief assessment, which he defines as an epistemic duty, and its relationship with basic beliefs is discussed. Finally, the paper addresses the issue of how the truth of any religion ought to be understood in the absence of objective evidence. This paper seeks to examine the thesis of epistemic parity, which has come to the fore in the context of religious diversity and to provide a framework for the debates around this issue.

• Details
• Contents