Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Testimony constitutes an irreducible, non-inferential sou... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Some sources of evidence are merely derivative, deriving their justificatory power from a more basic source.

    Testimony constitutes an irreducible, non-inferential source of justification, as argued by C.A.J. Coady's anti-reductionism about testimony.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.We rely on testimony for most knowledge (history, science, medicine) without consciously inferring it from speaker reliability.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Requiring inference from reliability presupposes we already know reliability facts, creating regress without independent justification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Children acquire language and knowledge through testimony before developing inferential reasoning capacities.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.We implicitly assess speaker competence and honesty; this evaluation grounds justification even if not conscious or explicit.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Anti-reductionism risks accepting false testimony as justified belief if speaker seems sincere, absent reliability constraints.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Distinguishing testimonial justification from gullibility requires some inferential uptake of speaker credibility facts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedSkepticism1 linked

    Related

    Anti-reductionism risks accepting false testimony as justified belief if speaker...Children acquire language and knowledge through testimony before developing infe...Distinguishing testimonial justification from gullibility requires some inferent...Requiring inference from reliability presupposes we already know reliability fac...
    +3 moreShow less
    Some sources of evidence are merely derivative, deriving their justificatory pow...We implicitly assess speaker competence and honesty; this evaluation grounds jus...We rely on testimony for most knowledge (history, science, medicine) without con...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit