Description:
<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>This paper replies to commentary on my <jats:italic>On Evidence in Philosophy</jats:italic>, offered by critics Michael Bergmann and Earl Conee. It addresses their concerns regarding (1) whether my explanatory coherentism can explain the justification of introspective beliefs; (2) whether my epistemology is really coherentist rather than foundationalist; (3) my Principle of Humility; (4) my defense of free‐will compatibilism; (5) whether question‐begging is always unacceptable; and (6) whether intuitions qualify as evidence.</jats:p>