Knowledge Tree
global reductionism
Also known as: Global Reductionists
Facts (10)
Sources
Epistemological Problems of Testimony plato.stanford.edu Apr 1, 2021 8 facts
claimLocal Reductionism avoids the problems of Global Reductionism by evaluating the reliability of individual pieces of testimony on a case-by-case basis rather than treating testimony as a unified category.
claimThe objection that Local Reductionism precludes children from learning from parental testimony also applies to Global Reductionism.
claimOpponents of Global Reductionism argue that acquiring non-testimonial reasons to justify the general reliability of testimony leads to either a vicious circle or an insurmountable regress, as confirming the reliability of one speaker often requires relying on the testimony of others.
claimReductionists in social epistemology are divided into two camps: Global Reductionists and Local Reductionists, based on their disagreement over how the thesis of Positive Reasons should be understood.
perspectiveCritics of Global Reductionism argue that it is a mistake to treat testimony as a unified, homogeneous category of knowledge, because the reliability of testimony varies significantly depending on the subject matter, such as the difference between music preferences and political opinions.
claimGlobal Reductionists argue that testimonial justification can be reduced to a combination of perceptual, memorial, and inferential justification, involving perceiving an utterance, remembering past reliability of testimony, and inferring the truth of the current statement.
claimOpponents of Global Reductionism argue that justifying the general reliability of testimony requires individuals to independently verify a vast number of facts, which is practically impossible due to time and resource constraints.
claimLocal Reductionism avoids the vicious circles and regresses associated with Global Reductionism because it does not require third-party testimony to establish the reliability of a speaker.
Social Epistemology - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy plato.stanford.edu Feb 26, 2001 1 fact
claimGlobal reductionism holds that for a listener to justifiably accept a speaker's report, the listener must possess non-testimonially based positive reasons to believe that testimony is generally reliable.
Social Epistemology - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy plato.stanford.edu Aug 28, 2019 1 fact
perspectiveC.A.J. Coady argues against global reductionism, asserting that the observational basis of ordinary epistemic agents is too limited to support an inductive inference regarding the general reliability of testimony.