Anonymity and testimonial warrant

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Matheson, David
Data de Publicação: 2004
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Principia (Florianópolis. Online)
Texto Completo: https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/article/view/14644
Resumo: Reductionism as an approach to the epistemology of testimony places certain demands on the recipient of testimony that its competitor, antireductionism, does not. After laying out the two approaches and their respective demands on the recipient of testimony, I argue that reductionism also places certainanonymity-shedding demands on the testifier that antireductionism does not. The difficulty of deciding between the approaches leads to a worry about the extent to which the current state of affairs in epistemology can offer secureadvice on the sorts of anonymity constraints that a networked society should place on its testifiers. This worry can be mitigated, I further argue, upon recognition of the fact that the two approaches stand on common ground when it comes to cases of known testimonial conflict.
id UFSC-5_777a953c9aa42b99b2902938b2e8fadd
oai_identifier_str oai:periodicos.ufsc.br:article/14644
network_acronym_str UFSC-5
network_name_str Principia (Florianópolis. Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Anonymity and testimonial warrantAnonymity and Testimonial WarrantReductionism as an approach to the epistemology of testimony places certain demands on the recipient of testimony that its competitor, antireductionism, does not. After laying out the two approaches and their respective demands on the recipient of testimony, I argue that reductionism also places certainanonymity-shedding demands on the testifier that antireductionism does not. The difficulty of deciding between the approaches leads to a worry about the extent to which the current state of affairs in epistemology can offer secureadvice on the sorts of anonymity constraints that a networked society should place on its testifiers. This worry can be mitigated, I further argue, upon recognition of the fact that the two approaches stand on common ground when it comes to cases of known testimonial conflict.O reducionismo como uma abordagem à epistemologia do testemunho faz certas exigências àquele que recebe o testemunho, que a posição contrária, o anti-reducionismo, não faz. Depois de estabelecer as duas abordagens e suas respetivas exigências sobre aquele que recebe o testemunho, argumentamos que o reducionismo também faz determinadas exigências àquele que testifica, que o anti-reducionismo não faz. A dificuldade de decidir entre as duas abordagens conduz a uma preocupação com a extensão na qual o estado atual de coisas na epistemologia pode oferecer indicação segura sobre o tipo de exigências de anomimato que uma sociedade posta em rede faria àqueles que prestam testemunho. Argumentamos também que essa preocupação pode ser mitigada com o reconhecimento do fato de que as duas abordagens possuem uma base comum quando é preciso considerar casos de conflito de testemunhos.Federal University of Santa Catarina – UFSC2004-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/article/view/1464410.5007/%xPrincipia: an international journal of epistemology; Vol. 8 No. 2 (2004); 213-231Principia: an international journal of epistemology; Vol. 8 Núm. 2 (2004); 213-231Principia: an international journal of epistemology; v. 8 n. 2 (2004); 213-2311808-17111414-4247reponame:Principia (Florianópolis. Online)instname:Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC)instacron:UFSCporhttps://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/article/view/14644/13391Copyright (c) 2021 David Mathesonhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessMatheson, David2016-01-02T12:16:04Zoai:periodicos.ufsc.br:article/14644Revistahttps://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principiaPUBhttps://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/oaiprincipia@contato.ufsc.br||principia@contato.ufsc.br1808-17111414-4247opendoar:2016-01-02T12:16:04Principia (Florianópolis. Online) - Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Anonymity and testimonial warrant
Anonymity and Testimonial Warrant
title Anonymity and testimonial warrant
spellingShingle Anonymity and testimonial warrant
Matheson, David
title_short Anonymity and testimonial warrant
title_full Anonymity and testimonial warrant
title_fullStr Anonymity and testimonial warrant
title_full_unstemmed Anonymity and testimonial warrant
title_sort Anonymity and testimonial warrant
author Matheson, David
author_facet Matheson, David
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Matheson, David
description Reductionism as an approach to the epistemology of testimony places certain demands on the recipient of testimony that its competitor, antireductionism, does not. After laying out the two approaches and their respective demands on the recipient of testimony, I argue that reductionism also places certainanonymity-shedding demands on the testifier that antireductionism does not. The difficulty of deciding between the approaches leads to a worry about the extent to which the current state of affairs in epistemology can offer secureadvice on the sorts of anonymity constraints that a networked society should place on its testifiers. This worry can be mitigated, I further argue, upon recognition of the fact that the two approaches stand on common ground when it comes to cases of known testimonial conflict.
publishDate 2004
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2004-01-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/article/view/14644
10.5007/%x
url https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/article/view/14644
identifier_str_mv 10.5007/%x
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/article/view/14644/13391
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2021 David Matheson
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2021 David Matheson
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Federal University of Santa Catarina – UFSC
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Federal University of Santa Catarina – UFSC
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Principia: an international journal of epistemology; Vol. 8 No. 2 (2004); 213-231
Principia: an international journal of epistemology; Vol. 8 Núm. 2 (2004); 213-231
Principia: an international journal of epistemology; v. 8 n. 2 (2004); 213-231
1808-1711
1414-4247
reponame:Principia (Florianópolis. Online)
instname:Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC)
instacron:UFSC
instname_str Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC)
instacron_str UFSC
institution UFSC
reponame_str Principia (Florianópolis. Online)
collection Principia (Florianópolis. Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Principia (Florianópolis. Online) - Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv principia@contato.ufsc.br||principia@contato.ufsc.br
_version_ 1789435108940316672