Doug's right on.
I had a conversation today where the typical question presented to people who hold to a non-foundational approach - Wasn't Jesus' statement 'I am the way, the truth and the life' a foundationalist presupposition.
I can't count the number of times that people have used this statement to suggest an exclusivist view or foundationalist view (there may well be an argument made for these positions but this passage is not it).
It is so maddening sometimes, not in the case of this conversation today, but it drives me mad.
It would be like taking the other seven 'I Am' statements in John and thinking of them as literal statements - Jesus is really bread, really a vine, really a shepherd, or a door.
All of those are much better than that. Jesus was likening himself to Torah in the Way, Truth and Life. That was how the Torah was referred to, so Jesus was saying that he was as Torah.
There is great significance to this, all of which, in my opinion, are lost by the foundationalist perspective.
So the next time I hear someone say there must be absolute truth because Jesus said he was truth I am going to invite them to my house to hang a Jesus door, or prune the Jesus vines.