nonevidential

Nonevidential is an adjective describing reasons, beliefs, or justification that do not depend on evidence or evidential support. The term is used mainly in epistemology and philosophy of religion to contrast with evidential justification. A nonevidential account holds that one may be warranted in holding certain beliefs for reasons other than evidence, such as the reliability of cognitive processes, coherence with a broader worldview, or basic experiential states.

In philosophy, nonevidential justification is often discussed in contrast to evidentialism, the view that justified belief must be based on evidence. A key topic is whether some beliefs can be rational or warranted without inferential support from evidence. Alvin Plantinga and other proponents of reformed epistemology have argued for the notion of properly basic beliefs, which can be rational without evidential justification. Such beliefs are supposed to ground other beliefs and include certain religious, moral, or perceptual beliefs that arise from basic cognitive functioning rather than from argumentative evidence.

Usage of the term covers religious beliefs, moral intuitions, and some basic perceptual or experiential judgments. Critics worry that nonevidential justification can permit arbitrary or unfounded beliefs, complicate intersubjective assessment of rationality, and threaten epistemic accountability. Proponents respond that it reflects a realistic account of how many beliefs originate and are justified in ordinary life, and that rational appraisal can occur without requiring explicit evidence for every belief.

See also: evidentialism, properly basic beliefs, reformed epistemology.