Review of Philosophy and Psychology 1 (4):531-549 (2010)
Philosophers agree that an important part of our knowledge is acquired via testimony. One of the main objectives of social epistemology is therefore to specify the conditions under which a hearer is justified in accepting a proposition stated by a source. Non-reductionists, who think that testimony could be considered as an a priori source of knowledge, as well as reductionists, who think that another type of justification has to be added to testimony, share a common conception about children development. Non-reductionists believe that infants and children are fundamentally gullible and their gullibility could be seen as an example for justifying testimony, while reductionists believe that this gullibility is merely an exception that should be taken into account. The objective of this paper is to review contemporary literature in developmental psychology providing empirical grounds likely to clarify this philosophical debate. What emerges from current research is a more elaborated vision of children’s attitude toward testimony. Even at a very young age, children do not blindly swallow information coming from testimony; doubtful or contradictory information is automatically screened by their cognitive system. Even if they are unable to give positive reasons for the acceptance of a given testimony, young children are not gullible. Such empirical findings tend to call into question the radical opposition between reductionism and non-reductionism
|Keywords||Philosophy Philosophy of Science Developmental Psychology Epistemology Neurosciences Cognitive Psychology Philosophy of Mind|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
The Adapted Mind: Evolutionary Psychology and the Generation of Culture.Jerome Barkow, Leda Cosmides & John Tooby (eds.) - 1992 - Oxford University Press.
Machiavellian Intelligence: Social Expertise and the Evolution of Intellect in Monkeys, Apes, and Humans.R. W. Byrne & Andrew Whiten (eds.) - 1988 - Oxford University Press.
The Advancement of Science: Science Without Legend, Objectivity Without Illusions.Philip Kitcher - 1993 - Oxford University Press.
Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society.Bruno Latour - 1987 - Harvard University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
Epistemic Vigilance.Dan Sperber, Fabrice Clément, Christophe Heintz, Olivier Mascaro, Hugo Mercier, Gloria Origgi & Deirdre Wilson - 2010 - Mind and Language 25 (4):359-393.
Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory.Dan Sperber - 2011 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 34 (2):57.
The Epistemic Status of Processing Fluency as Source for Judgments of Truth.Rolf Reber & Christian Unkelbach - 2010 - Review of Philosophy and Psychology 1 (4):563-581.
Bullshit as a Problem of Social Epistemology.Joshua Wakeham - 2017 - Sociological Theory 35 (1):15-38.
Lexical Norms, Language Comprehension, and the Epistemology of Testimony.Endre Begby - 2014 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 44 (3-4):324-342.
Similar books and articles
Monitoring and Anti-Reductionism in the Epistemology of Testimony.Sanford Goldberg & David Henderson - 2006 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 72 (3):600 - 617.
A Defense of Reductionism About Testimonial Justification of Beliefs.Tomoji Shogenji - 2006 - Noûs 40 (2):331–346.
Children's Selective Learning From Others.Erika Nurmsoo, Elizabeth Robinson & Stephen Andrew Butterfill - 2010 - Review of Philosophy and Psychology 1 (4):551-561.
I Can Trust You Now … but Not Later: An Explanation of Testimonial Knowledge in Children.Joshue Orozco - 2010 - Acta Analytica 25 (2):195-214.
The Basis of Epistemic Trust: Reliable Testimony or Reliable Sources?Paul L. Harris & Melissa A. Koenig - 2007 - Episteme 4 (3):264-284.
Added to index2010-04-17
Total downloads62 ( #82,407 of 2,153,861 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #224,989 of 2,153,861 )
How can I increase my downloads?