Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T03:30:26.162Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

NONINFERENTIALISM AND TESTIMONIAL BELIEF FIXATION

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 March 2013

Tim Kenyon
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An influential view in the epistemology of testimony is that typical or paradigmatic beliefs formed through testimonial uptake are noninferential. Some epistemologists in particular defend a causal version of this view: that beliefs formed from testimony (BFT) are generated by noninferential processes. This view is implausible, however. It tends to be elaborated in terms that do not really bear it out – e.g. that BFT is fixed directly, immediately, unconsciously or automatically. Nor is causal noninferentialism regarding BFT plausibly expressed in terms of belief-independent belief formation; the complex cognitive details of BFT fixation do not accord well with such a view. But perhaps the most significant issue is that the relevant causal notion of inference itself is not particularly well-defined, at least with respect to BFT. Causal noninferentialism in this domain is obscure as a result, but this does not in turn clearly vindicate any interesting version of inferentialism.

Type
Articles
Information
Episteme , Volume 10 , Issue 1 , March 2013 , pp. 73 - 85
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Audi, R. 1993. ‘Belief, Reason, and Inference.’ In The Structure of Justification, pp. 233–73. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Audi, R. 2003. Epistemology: A Contemporary Introduction to the Theory of Knowledge. 2nd edn.New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Audi, R. 2006. ‘Testimony, Credulity, and Veracity.’ In Lackey, J. and Sosa, E. (eds), The Epistemology of Testimony, pp. 25–49. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Blair, I. 2001. ‘Implicit Stereotypes and Prejudice.’ In Moskowitz, G. (ed.), Cognitive Social Psychology: On the Tenure and Future of Social Cognition, pp. 359–74. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Coady, C. A. J. 1992. Testimony: A Philosophical Study. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cutler, B. L., Penrod, D. S., and Stuve, T. E. 1988. ‘Juror Decision Making in Eyewitness Identification Cases.’ Law and Human Behavior, 12: 41–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dretske, F. 1988. Explaining Behavior: Reasons in a World of Causes. Cambridge MA: Bradford/MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gigerenzer, G. and Murray, D. 1987. Cognition as Intuitive Statistics. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Goldman, A. 1992. ‘What is Justified Belief?’ Liaisons. Cambridge MA: MIT Press. 105–26. Originally published in Pappas, G. (ed), Justification and Knowledge. Dordrecht-Holland: D. Reidel. 1979.Google Scholar
Goldman, A. 1999. Knowledge in a Social World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Huemer, M. 2007. ‘Compassionate Phenomenal Conservatism.’ Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 74: 30–55.Google Scholar
Kersten, D., Mamassian, P., and Yuille, A. 2004. ‘Object Perception as Bayesian Inference.’ Annual Review of Psychology, 55: 271–304.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kihlstrom, J. 1987. ‘The Cognitive Unconscious.’ Science, 237: 1445–52.Google Scholar
Kripke, S. 1980. Naming and Necessity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Lackey, J. 2008. Learning from Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Moser, Paul. 1989. Knowledge and Evidence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pappas, G. 1982. ‘Noninferential Knowledge.’ Philosophia, 12: 81–98.Google Scholar
Pritchard, D. 2004. ‘The Epistemology of Testimony.’ Philosophical Issues, 14: 326–48.Google Scholar
Pryor, J. 2005. ‘There is Immediate Justification.’ In Steup, M. and Sosa, E. (eds), Contemporary Debates in Epistemology., pp. 181–201. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Swain, M. 1981. Reasons and Knowledge. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Weiner, M. 2003. ‘Accepting Testimony.’ Philosophical Quarterly, 53: 256–64.Google Scholar