Knowledge Tree
Relations (1)
cross_type 1.00 — strongly supporting 10 facts
David Hume is a central figure in the philosophical analysis of testimony, with his reductionist perspective on testimonial belief documented in [1] and his views on the reliability of testimony analyzed by scholars in [2], [3], and [4]. Furthermore, Hume himself explicitly addressed the necessity and nature of testimony in his own writings as noted in [5].
Facts (10)
Sources
Epistemological Problems of Testimony plato.stanford.edu 6 facts
referenceAxel Gelfert revisited David Hume's views on testimony in a 2010 article.
referenceSaul Traiger published the article 'Experience and Testimony in Hume’s Philosophy' in the journal Episteme in 2010.
claimJordan Howard Sobel provides a Bayesian interpretation of David Hume's analysis of the evidence of testimony for miracles in his 1987 paper published in The Philosophical Quarterly.
claimDavid Owen's 1987 article 'Hume versus Price on Miracles and Prior Probabilities: Testimony and the Bayesian Calculation' compares the views of Hume and Price on miracles, testimony, and Bayesian probability.
referenceSaul Traiger published the article 'Humean Testimony' in the Pacific Philosophical Quarterly in 1993.
claimMichael Root analyzes David Hume's views on the virtues of testimony in his 2001 paper published in the American Philosophical Quarterly.
Epistemology of Testimony | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy iep.utm.edu 4 facts
perspectiveDavid Hume's reductionist perspective posits that individuals properly form beliefs based on testimony only because they have observed other confirmed instances of the veracity of human testimony, meaning testimonial justification is reducible to perceptual, memorial, and inferential justification.
quoteDavid Hume stated: "[T]here is no species of reasoning more common, more useful, and more necessary to human life, than that which is derived from the testimony of men, and the reports of eye-witnesses and spectators. … [O]ur assurance in any argument of this kind is derived from no other principle than our observation of the veracity of human testimony, and of the usual conformity of facts to the reports of witnesses."
claimFew contemporary philosophers endorse the full form of David Hume's reductionist or inferentialist approach to testimonially-based belief.
claimCoady documents that David Hume, when describing the inductive base for a belief in the reliability of testimony, mistakenly relies on evidence drawn from other people's testimony.