Character and Knowledge: Learning from the Speech of Experts [Book Review]
Argumentation 25 (3):341-353 (2011)
Abstract
This paper discusses the ways in which a person’s character ( ethos ) and a hearer’s emotional response ( pathos ) are part of the complex judgments made about experts’ claims, along with an actual assessment of those claims ( logos ). The analysis is rooted in the work of Aristotle, but expands to consider work on emotion and cognition conducted by Thagard and Gigerenzer. It also draws on some conclusions of the general epistemology of testimony (of which expert testimony is a special subset), where it is argued that we learn not just from the transmission of another’s beliefs, but from the words they speak. This shifts the onus in testimony away from the intentions of a speaker onto the judgments of an audience, capturing better its social character and reflecting our experience of receiving testimony. I conclude, however, that accepting the arguments of experts involves much more than simply believing what they sayAuthor's Profile
DOI
10.1007/s10503-011-9224-9
My notes
Similar books and articles
Expert testimony and epistemological free-riding: The mmr controversy.Stephen John - 2011 - Philosophical Quarterly 61 (244):496-517.
Learning From Words: Testimony as a Source of Knowledge.Jennifer Lackey - 2008 - Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Learning from words.Jennifer Lackey - 2006 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 73 (1):77–101.
Re-Thinking the Duplication of Speaker/Hearer Belief in the Epistemology of Testimony.Joel Buenting - 2005 - Episteme: Journal of Social Epistemology 2 (2):43-48.
Problems of sincerity.Richard Moran - 2005 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 105 (3):341–361.
Testimony as a Social Foundation of Knowledge.Robert Audi - 2013 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 87 (3):507-531.
Transmuted Expertise: How Technical Non-Experts Can Assess Experts and Expertise. [REVIEW]Harry Collins & Martin Weinel - 2011 - Argumentation 25 (3):401-413.
Expert judgement and expert disagreement.Jeryl L. Mumpower & Thomas R. Stewart - 1996 - Thinking and Reasoning 2 (2 & 3):191 – 212.
Testimony: Evidence and Responsibility.Matthew Carl Weiner - 2003 - Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh
Analytics
Added to PP
2011-08-02
Downloads
59 (#203,142)
6 months
1 (#454,876)
2011-08-02
Downloads
59 (#203,142)
6 months
1 (#454,876)
Historical graph of downloads
Author's Profile
Citations of this work
From Theory of Rhetoric to the Practice of Language Use: The Case of Appeals to Ethos Elements.Marcin Koszowy, Katarzyna Budzynska, Martín Pereira-Fariña & Rory Duthie - 2022 - Argumentation 36 (1):123-149.
A verisimilitudinarian analysis of the Linda paradox.Gustavo Cevolani, Vincenzo Crupi & Roberto Festa - 2012 - VII Conference of the Spanish Society for Logic, Methodology and Philosphy of Science.
The Authority of Citations and Quotations in Academic Papers.Begoña Carrascal - 2014 - Informal Logic 34 (2):167-191.
The Legitimacy of Pseudo‐Expert Discourse in the Public Sphere.Sarah Sorial - 2017 - Metaphilosophy 48 (3):304-324.
References found in this work
Relevance: Communication and Cognition.Dan Sperber & Deirdre Wilson - 1995 [1986] - Oxford: Blackwell.
Argumentation Schemes.Douglas Walton, Chris Reed & Fabrizio Macagno - 2008 - Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
Learning From Words: Testimony as a Source of Knowledge.Jennifer Lackey - 2008 - Oxford: Oxford University Press.