Externalism, Warrant, and the Question of Relativism

What is it about?

Richard Davis and Paul Franks criticize James K. A. Smith's postmodern pentecostal theory of knowledge as relativistic and arbitrary. This article defends Smith in three steps. First, it provides a brief exposition of Smith's theory in order to show its compatibility with Alvin Platinga's theory of knowledge and Davis' and Franks' misunderstanding of Smith. Second, it analyzes and critiques the stated criticisms and assumptions. Third, it enlists Plantinga to show that Smith's theory is compatible with Plantinga's theory that argues belief can be knowledge without awareness of justifying evidence or arguments. If the argument is successful, then Davis and Franks have to defeat Plantinga's theory of knowledge in order to defeat Smith.

Featured Image