Repository | Journal | Volume | Articles
(2018) Synthese 195 (7).
Formulating reductionism about testimonial warrant and the challenge from childhood testimony
Peter J. Graham
pp. 3013-3033
The case of very young children is a test case for the plausibility of reductionism about testimonial warrant. Reductionism requires reductive reasons, reductively justified and actively deployed for testimonial justification. Though nascent language-users enjoy warranted testimony based beliefs, they do not meet these three reductionist demands. This paper clearly formulates reductionism and the infant/child objection. Two rejoinders are discussed: an influential conceptual argument from Jennifer Lackey’s paper “Testimony and the Infant/Child Objection” and the growing empirical evidence from developmental psychology on selective trust in children. Neither Lackey’s argument nor the empirical evidence vindicate reductionism.
Publication details
DOI: 10.1007/s11229-016-1140-y
Full citation:
Graham, P. J. (2018). Formulating reductionism about testimonial warrant and the challenge from childhood testimony. Synthese 195 (7), pp. 3013-3033.
This document is unfortunately not available for download at the moment.