Integrated Justification
“I propose integrated justification—a tripartite framework requiring coherence, grounding, and a proper basing relation—as a minimal standard for evaluating artificial epistemic agents.”
— Coherent Without Grounding, Grounded Without Success (2026), §1.5
Why it matters
Integrated Justification is the constructive proposal of CWG: it specifies what would need to obtain for the attribution of understanding to an artificial agent to be warranted. It converts the negative diagnosis of the Bidirectional Coherence Paradox into a positive criterion against which future architectures can be evaluated.
Notes
The framework supplies a taxonomy of epistemic profiles. The two diagnosed by the Bidirectional Coherence Paradox—Type A (Coherent Without Grounding) and Type B (Grounded Without Success)—each possess two of the three required components but lack the third or its proper basing. Genuine understanding, in this taxonomy, is the profile in which all three components are present and properly connected.
The proposal is positioned within the broader epistemological landscape: neither coherentism, foundationalism, nor Haack’s foundherentism alone captures what is required for evaluating artificial reasoning. The tripartite structure is offered as a minimum standard, not a sufficient condition.