ABSTRACT
The essence of the reformed challenge is to accuse the foundationalist of claiming to have a criterion of rationality. In criticising the reformed challenge to foundationalism, it is no part of the author's intention to deny the conclusion that foundationalism fails to provide coherent account of reason, by reference to which, rationality of epistemic practices is to be judged. The fundamental issue for Reformed epistemology is whether the believer is justified in placing belief in God in the foundations of his noetic structure. Sometimes, the conviction that learning must involve having an experience is confused with the correct observation that the child must be brought to calculate for himself. The child must not be simply memorising the next number in the series. By relativising and psychologising the notion of self-evidence Plantinga makes the reaction of the individual all-important and self-evidence a mere function of it.
