The Trilemma of Justification

Justification cannot be the foundation of knowledge.

Every chain of justification faces three possible outcomes:

1. Infinite regress: each reason calls for another, and the chain never ends.
2. Circularity: a belief is justified by an appeal that eventually returns to itself. For example: “This rule is right because it’s the rule.”
3. Dogma: the chain stops at an unexamined assumption declared self-evident.

These exhaust the logical possibilities: either reasons continue indefinitely, repeat, or stop.

This is also known as the Münchhausen Trilemma, or Agrippa's Trilemma.

We learn this trilemma before we even learn to read:

"Clean your room." "Why?" "Because if you clean your room, you'll be able to get to your bed without breaking anything." "Why?" "Because I don't want to buy you new toys." "Why?" "Because they are expensive." "Why?" "Because people have to make them." "Why?" "BECAUSE I TOLD YOU SO!"

Every answer demands another premise until the parent resorts to authority, which is dogma.

We all reach "because I said so" eventually. The trilemma just reminds us why.

The trilemma does not tell us how to avoid this outcome, only that justification cannot be the foundation of knowledge.

Addendum

Baron Münchhausen is a fictional character that attempted to pull himself out of a mire by lifting himself by his own hair.

The metaphor captures the problem directly: justification attempts to lift itself into certainty using nothing but its own structure.

For those of us that don't speak German, Münchhausen can be roughly pronounced “MOONK-how-zen”. The anglicized form "MUNCH-how-zen" is a bit smoother and also widely accepted.

2025-10-04 Aaron Brinton
2026-01-06 structural updates; added circularity example