The mathematician's goal might be to determine the angle of a triangle; the painter's goal might be to assault the viewer's eye with a distorted or 'wrong' proportion or using an impossible perspective. In other words, the criterion depends on the desired result of the project and the type of literal or figurative knowledge one wishes to convey. Neither system of knowledge is better, merely different, with different criteria or goals. Elgin's statement of reflective equilibrium acknowledges human beings have many different goals in knowing something is true or right. Sometimes our goal is to make something practical, as when seeking knowledge in a scientific truth. Other times it is to reconcile two different moral ideas from two different systems. Other times it might be to create art. Elgin is not a relativist, a charge that might be leveled at her words by some foundationalists. She states that one needs "initially tenable commitments," in other words, a coherent system of goals, standards, and theories to met and set and accept...

(107)
Elgin notes that formalism's strictness has done little to sweep away "the unfortunate propensity for error" that characterizes human knowledge construction, even in the most rationalistic science and philosophy. (12) Instead, human beings must accept the limited ability to create a perfect, formulaic system of knowledge, given the diverse needs of the all-too human world and the imperfect nature of the human senses. Human beings must instead rely human capacity to "retrench, retool, and try again," through using a series of different set criteria, dependant upon the circumstances. (1) Although the criteria, whether mathematical, philosophical, or artistic must be set beforehand, this does not mean that any one set of criteria is better than the other, rather all have potential uses to teach human beings lessons about seeking valid sources of knowledge in the world.

Works Cited

Elgin, Catherine Z. Considered Judgment. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1996.