Knowledge Tree
Relations (1)
cross_type 1.00 — strongly supporting 11 facts
Thomas Reid is a central figure in the philosophy of testimony, having developed a theory that treats it as a basic source of justification [1], [2]. He argued for the principle of credulity [3] and posited that humans possess an innate faculty to trust testimony [4], distinguishing it from other forms of evidence [5], [6].
Facts (11)
Sources
Epistemology of Testimony | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy iep.utm.edu 7 facts
claimThomas Reid (1785) defines testimony as a situation where the epistemic subject relies on the testifier's authority for the truth of a proposition.
quoteAlvin Plantinga, citing Thomas Reid, stated in 1993: "Reid is surely right in thinking that the beliefs we form by way of credulity or testimony are typically held in the basic way, not by way of inductive or abductive evidence from other things I believe. I am five years old; my father tells me that Australia is a large country and occupies an entire continent all by itself. I don’t say to myself, “My father says thus and so; most of the time when I have checked what he says has turned out to be true; so probably this is; so probably Australia is a very large country that occupies an entire continent by itself.” I could reason that way and in certain specialized circumstances we do reason that way. But typically we don’t. Typically we just believe what we are told, and believe it in the basic way. … I say I could reason in the inductive way to what testimony testifies to; but of course I could not have reasoned thus in coming to the first beliefs I held on the basis of testimony."
claimThomas Reid (1785) distinguishes testimony by the epistemic subject relying on the testifier's authority for the truth of a proposition.
claimThomas Reid, a prototype non-reductionist, acknowledged significant disanalogies between beliefs based on perception and beliefs based on testimony.
quoteThomas Reid (1785) stated: “There is no doubt an analogy between the evidence of the senses and the evidence of testimony. … But there is a real difference between the two as well as a similarity. When we believe something on the basis of someone’s testimony, we rely on that person’s authority. But we have no such authority for believing our senses.”
claimThomas Reid's theory of testimony holds that testimonially-based justification is not reducible to perceptual or inferential justification because it relies on an innate faculty.
claimThomas Reid suggests that humans possess an innate faculty that causes them to trust those who testify, which is not confirmed by personally observed earlier instances.
Epistemology - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy plato.stanford.edu 1 fact
claimThomas Reid suggested that humans have a natural tendency to accept testimonial sources as reliable and to attribute credibility to them unless there are specific reasons to believe otherwise.
Social Epistemology – Introduction to Philosophy - Rebus Press press.rebus.community 1 fact
claimThomas Reid's argument, known as the 'not enough evidence objection' (NEEO), posits that reductionism implies individuals are rarely justified in believing testimony, which serves as a powerful objection to non-skeptical reductionism.
Social Epistemology - Open Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science oecs.mit.edu 1 fact
claimThomas Reid argued for the principle of credulity, which asserts the right to trust the word of others.
Epistemological Problems of Testimony plato.stanford.edu 1 fact
perspectiveThomas Reid (1983) argues that whatever reasons exist for considering perception a basic source of justification also apply to testimony as a basic source of justification.