Implicit Trust in the Space of Reasons and Implications for Technology Design: A Response to Justine Pila

Social Epistemology 23 (1):25-43 (2009)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In this issue, Pila (2009) has criticised the recommendations made by requirements engineers involved in the design of a grid technology for the support of distributed readings of mammograms made by Jirotka et al. (2005). The disagreement between them turns on the notion of “biographical familiarity” and whether it can be a sound basis for trust for the performances of professionals such as radiologists. In the first two sections, this paper gives an interpretation of the position of each side in this disagreement and their recommendation for the design of technology for distributed reading, and in the third the underlying reasons for this disagreement are discussed. It is argued that Pila, in attempting to make room for mistrust as well as trust, brings to the fore the question of having and reflecting upon reasons for trust or mistrust. Pila holds that biographical familiarity is not a sound reason for trust/mistrust, as it seems to obliterate the possibility of mistrust. In response to her proposal, an analysis is proposed of the forms of trust involved in biographical familiarity. In particular, implicit trust is focused upon—as a form of trust in advance of reasons, and as a form of trust contained (in the logical sense) within other reasons. It is proposed that implicit trust has an important role in establishing an intersubjectively shared world in which what counts as a reason for the acceptability of performances such as readings of X-rays is established. Implicit trust, therefore, is necessary for professionals to enter into a “space of reasons”. To insist upon judgements made in the absence of the form of implicit trust at play in biographical familiarity is to demand that radiologists (and other relevantly similar professionals) make judgements regarding whether to trust or mistrust on the basis of reasons capable of being reflected upon, but at the same time leave them without reasons upon which to reflect

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 102,141

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Implicit Trust in the Space of Reasons.Annamaria Carusi - 2009 - Journal of Social Epistemology 23 (1):25-43.
Forms of trust in education and development.Ben Spiecker - 1990 - Studies in Philosophy and Education 10 (2):157-164.
Trust, Testimony, and Reasons for Belief.Rebecca Wallbank & Andrew Reisner - 2020 - In Scott Stapleford & Kevin McCain (eds.), Epistemic Duties: New Arguments, New Angles. New York: Routledge.
Nietzsche on Trust and Mistrust.Mark Alfano - 2023 - In Mark Alfano, David Collins & Iris Jovanovic (eds.), Perspectives on Trust in the History of Philosophy. Lanham: Lexington.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-07-12

Downloads
35 (#659,226)

6 months
5 (#1,084,146)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Annamaria Carusi
University of Copenhagen

References found in this work

Philosophical Investigations.Ludwig Wittgenstein - 1953 - New York, NY, USA: Wiley-Blackwell. Edited by G. E. M. Anscombe.
Intention.G. E. M. Anscombe - 1957 - Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
On Certainty (ed. Anscombe and von Wright).Ludwig Wittgenstein - 1969 - San Francisco: Harper Torchbooks. Edited by G. E. M. Anscombe, G. H. von Wright & Mel Bochner.
Trust and antitrust.Annette Baier - 1986 - Ethics 96 (2):231-260.
The role of trust in knowledge.John Hardwig - 1991 - Journal of Philosophy 88 (12):693-708.

View all 16 references / Add more references