For a detailed explanation of what the Munchausen Trilemma is all about, see "Wikipedia article; "Article by Michael Schmidt-Salomon.
The so-called Munchausen Trilemma states that every statement and thus every assured knowledge is strictly speaking impossible, since
- 1. it is impossible to give ultimate reasons for truth or knowledge (every reason in turn requires a reason, which in turn needs to be justified, which can be played on ad infinitum)
- a justification that comes to an end is either 2. circular (the justified becomes at some point again a justification itself)
- or 3. a justification that comes to an end is dogmatic and thus unfounded.
But since knowledge is justified true belief (definition of Plato), there can be no knowledge.
The logic of this way of argumentation seems completely conclusive, the train of thought logical, if there were not a problem: so that the train of thought is also true, it needs a truth criterion.
The Munchausen trilemma is a statement and therefore has by definition a definite truth value. Either the statement of the Munchausen trilemma is true or it is not true. This is true for every statement, completely independent of its content. If a linguistic expression is a statement, the two-valued logic applies to this expression. This means that the content of a statement plays no role at all for the fact whether the logic is valid for this statement. If the linguistic expression is to be able to be true or untrue, it is a statement and to be a statement, the expression presupposes the validity of the logic - INDEPENDENT of the content. So the content of the Munchausen trilemma plays no role at all for whether the logic is valid or not. It is already implicitly presupposed (since the trilemma is a statement), which is why the argument of the trilemma has no influence on the validity of the logic. Logic is not affected by the train of thought of the Munchausen trilemma, which is why it is the basis of truth, without which the Munchausen trilemma is on the one hand not true, on the other hand even meaningless, since the train of thought of the trilemma does not work without the validity of logic.
The Munchausen Trilemma claims to contain an absolute truth. Everyone who accepts the validity of the Munchausen trilemma sees no way out of it, which is why it can neither be merely partially true nor not true at all. Thus, however, the Munchausen trilemma factually asserts the following: It is absolutely true that there can be no absolute truth. Or modified: It is ultimately justified that there can be no ultimate justification (Vittorio Hösle). However, such a statement is obviously contradictory, which is why it must contain an error. This error is again due to the fact that the Munchausen trilemma implicitly presupposes logic, but seems to explicitly exclude it.
Munchausen trilemma and ultimate justification
A final justification, i.e. a justification which itself does not need to be justified, was found by Rene Descartes in the 16th century in the impossible doubt of doubt. A consciously thinking person (and this applies in principle to every perception) cannot doubt his conscious perception. Who thinks, thinks, who perceives consciously, perceives consciously. Who doubts about this fact - doubts. He who doubts has a consciously perceived thought, which is why his doubt cannot be doubted without committing a self-contradiction.
Thus, the final justification demanded by the Munchausen trilemma can be found quite well and that outside of the linguistic realm. The "ultimate justification", which is dogmatic in a certain sense, consists in the fact that knowledge cannot exist without conscious perception (knowledge is always knowledge of someone). Thus, the Munchausen trilemma presupposes the validity of logic and the existence of conscious perceptions - or it is meaningless. Since these elements are conditions of the Munchausen trilemma independent of the content of the trilemma, the thought process of the trilemma does not apply to them.
Accordingly, the Munchausen trilemma is only a pseudo-problem.