Agrippa’s Trilemma

Description
The Agrippan Trilemma, also known as Munchausen Trilemma is a skeptical argument claiming that any attempt to justify a belief inevitably ends in one of three unsatisfactory options: infinite regress, circular reasoning, or arbitrary dogmatic stopping points.

In modern philosophy, the trilemma is closely related to what is sometimes called the Münchhausen Trilemma (popularized in 20th‑century discussions of justification, especially in philosophy of science and critical rationalism). Despite terminological variations, the core idea remains the same: attempts to justify any belief ultimately fall into one of three unsatisfactory patterns.

The Agrippan Trilemma targets the structure of justification rather than any specific belief. It begins from the assumption that for a belief to be epistemically justified, it must be supported by reasons. Once that demand for reasons is taken seriously and pushed consistently, three—and only three—kinds of justificatory structure seem possible:

• infinite regress , see infinitism
• circular argument, see coherentism
• dogmatic argument, see foundationalism

Source: "Agrippan Trilemma" - Philopedia