Knowledge from scientific expert testimony without epistemic trust

Knowledge from scientific expert testimony without epistemic trust
复制标题

来自科学专家证词的知识,没有认知信任

DOI:
10.1007/s11229-018-01908-w
复制
发表时间:
2020
期刊:
影响因子:
1.5
通讯作者:
Leefmann
Leefmann
中科院分区:
人文科学2区
文献类型:
--
作者:
Leefmann

文献摘要

参考文献

被引文献

相似文献

在本文中,我们解决的问题,它是如何可能的非专家获得合理的真正相信从专家的证词。我们讨论还原论和认知信任的理论方法来回答这个问题,并提出了一个新的解决方案,避免了两个理论选项的主要问题:表演专家证词(PET)。PET借鉴了专门知识的功能性说明,因为它认为专家作为一个良好的信息提供者的可见度能够满足与其具体技能和知识同等重要的信息需求。我们解释了PET如何产生证明的信念,这是在一次评估的非专家,并保持他们和专家之间的认识劳动分工的理由。此后,我们为PET辩护,反对两个反对意见。首先,我们指出,非专家的兴趣,在获得广泛断言的真实信念和专家的兴趣,在保持她的地位,作为一个良好的线人抵消相对主义的理由在PET工作。第二,我们表明,在工作中的利益专家和非专家之间的证词交流,PET产生一个更好的解释,从专家证词的知识获取比外部主义帐户的理由,如reliabilism。由于我们的论点是以知识的概念为基础的,这种概念将信念辩护视为一种陈述性言语行为,在本文的最后部分,我们还指出了这样一个概念是如何在PET中操作的。
In this paper we address the question of how it can be possible for a non-expert to acquire justified true belief from expert testimony. We discuss reductionism and epistemic trust as theoretical approaches to answer this question and present a novel solution that avoids major problems of both theoretical options: Performative Expert Testimony (PET). PET draws on a functional account of expertise insofar as it takes the expert’s visibility as a good informant capable to satisfy informational needs as equally important as her specific skills and knowledge. We explain how PET generates justification for testimonial belief, which is at once assessable for non-experts and maintains the division of epistemic labor between them and the experts. Thereafter we defend PET against two objections. First, we point out that the non-expert’s interest in acquiring widely assertable true beliefs and the expert’s interest in maintaining her status as a good informant counterbalances the relativist account of justification at work in PET. Second, we show that with regard to the interests at work in testimonial exchanges between experts and non-experts, PET yields a better explanation of knowledge-acquisition from expert testimony than externalist accounts of justification such as reliabilism. As our arguments ground in a conception of knowledge, which conceives of belief-justification as a declarative speech act, throughout the rearmost sections of this paper we also indicate to how such a conception is operationalized in PET.
DOI: --
发表时间: 2002
期刊:
影响因子: --
作者:
G. Ernst
通讯作者: G. Ernst
DOI: --
发表时间: 1987
期刊:
影响因子: --
作者:
Terry J. Christlieb;L. Bonjour
通讯作者: L. Bonjour
认知权威:信任、权威和信仰自主的理论
DOI: --
发表时间: 2012
期刊:
影响因子: --
作者:
L. Zagzebski
通讯作者: L. Zagzebski
真相与其他谜团
DOI: --
发表时间: 1979
期刊:
影响因子: --
作者:
C. Williams
通讯作者: C. Williams
DOI: 10.2307/2027007
发表时间: 1991-12-01
影响因子: 1.3
作者:
HARDWIG, J
通讯作者: HARDWIG, J