Knowledge Tree
Relations (1)
cross_type 3.17 — strongly supporting 8 facts
Tyler Burge is a central figure in epistemology who developed a well-known argument regarding the a priori entitlement to accept testimony as true, as detailed in his 1993 work 'Content Preservation' {fact:1, fact:3, fact:6, fact:8}. His position on testimony has been the subject of significant critical debate concerning the reliability of testifiers and the rational faculties required for such entitlement {fact:2, fact:4, fact:5, fact:7}.
Facts (8)
Sources
Epistemology of Testimony | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy iep.utm.edu 7 facts
perspectiveCritics of Tyler Burge's argument regarding testimony contend that he fails to account for the necessary assumption that the testifier's rational faculties are functioning properly.
claimCritics of Tyler Burge's argument for a priori entitlement to testimony suggest that he overlooks the necessary assumption that the testifier's rational faculties are functioning properly.
claimTyler Burge (1993) argues that a subject is a priori entitled to accept a statement as true if that statement is intelligible and presented as true.
quoteTyler Burge states in his 1993 work: "We are a priori entitled to accept something that is prima facie intelligible and presented as true. For prima facie intelligible propositional contents prima facie presented as true bear an a priori prima facie conceptual relation to a rational source of true presentations-as-true: Intelligible propositional expressions presuppose rational abilities and entitlement; so intelligible presentations-as-true come prima facie backed by a rational source or resource of reason; and both the content of intelligible propositional presentations-as-true and the prima facie rationality of their source indicate a prima facie source of truth. Intelligible affirmation is the face of reason; reason is a guide to truth. We are a priori prima facie entitled to take intelligible affirmation at face value."
claimCritics argue that Tyler Burge's argument regarding the reliability of testifiers is problematic because it implies that individuals in any possible world are entitled to believe they are in a world where testifiers are generally reliable.
claimTyler Burge argues that we may ignore possible worlds where testifiers' truth-seeking faculties are not functioning properly because they are not relevant alternatives, similar to how non-skeptics ignore brain-in-a-vat scenarios.
claimTyler Burge (1993) argues that a subject (S) is a priori entitled to accept a testifier's (T) statement if that statement is intelligible and presented as true.
Social Epistemology - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy plato.stanford.edu 1 fact
claimTyler Burge argued in his 1993 paper 'Content Preservation' that testimony functions as a mechanism for preserving knowledge content.