Excessive testimony: When less is more

Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 107 (2):525-540 (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper identifies two distinct dimensions of what might be called testimonial strength: first, in the case of testimony from more than one speaker, testimony can be said to be stronger to the extent that a greater proportion of the speakers give identical testimony; second, in both single-speaker and multi-speaker testimony, testimony can be said to the stronger to the extent that each speaker expresses greater conviction in the relevant proposition. These two notions of testimonial strength have received scant attention in the philosophical literature so far, presumably because it has been thought that whatever lessons we learn from thinking about testimony as a binary phenomenon will apply mutatis mutandis to varying strengths of testimony. This paper shows that this will not work for either of the two aforementioned dimensions of testimonial strength, roughly because less testimony can provide more justification in a way that can only be explained by appealing to the (non-binary) strength of the testimony itself. The paper also argues that this result undermines some influential versions of non-reductionism about testimonial justification.

Similar books and articles

A Critical Introduction to Testimony.Axel Gelfert - 2014 - New York: Bloomsbury Academic.
Believing the Incomprehensible God: Aquinas on Understanding God’s Testimony.O. P. James Dominic Rooney - forthcoming - Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association.
Articulating Understanding: A Phenomenological Approach to Testimony on Gendered Violence.Charlotte Knowles - 2021 - International Journal of Philosophical Studies 29 (4):448-472.
Typing testimony.Peter J. Graham - 2021 - Synthese 199 (3-4):9463-9477.
Testimony, testimonial belief, and safety.Charlie Pelling - 2013 - Philosophical Studies 164 (1):205-217.
Circular testimony.Stephen Wright - 2016 - Philosophical Studies 173 (8):2029-2048.
Reconsidering the role of inference to the best explanation in the epistemology of testimony.Axel Gelfert - 2010 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 41 (4):386-396.
The Puzzle of Philosophical Testimony.Christopher Ranalli - 2019 - European Journal of Philosophy 28 (1):142-163.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-09-20

Downloads
372 (#48,605)

6 months
153 (#17,100)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Finnur Dellsén
University of Iceland

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Meaning.Herbert Paul Grice - 1957 - Philosophical Review 66 (3):377-388.
The skeptic and the dogmatist.James Pryor - 2000 - Noûs 34 (4):517–549.
Reflection and disagreement.Adam Elga - 2007 - Noûs 41 (3):478–502.
Content preservation.Tyler Burge - 1993 - Philosophical Review 102 (4):457-488.

View all 28 references / Add more references