Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. La libertad como el punto de encuentro para la construcción de la confianza en las relaciones humanas.Carlos Vargas-González & Iván-Darío Toro-Jaramillo - 2021 - Isegoría 65:09-09.
    This paper proposes freedom as the condition of possibility for the construction of trust in human relationships. The methodology used is a review of the scientific literature of the most recent moral and political philosophy. As a result of the dialogue between different positions, it is discovered that freedom, despite being present in the act of trust, is forgotten in the discussion around trust, a forgetfulness that has as its main causes the assumption that trust is natural and the confusion (...)
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Epistemic Buck-Passing and the Interpersonal View of Testimony.Judith Baker & Philip Clark - 2018 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 48 (2):178-199.
    Two ideas shape the epistemology of testimony. One is that testimony provides a unique kind of knowledge. The other is that testimonial knowledge is a social achievement. In traditional terms, those who affirm these ideas are anti-reductionists, and those who deny them are reductionists. There is increasing interest, however, in the possibility of affirming these ideas without embracing anti-reductionism. Thus, Sanford Goldberg uses the idea of epistemic buck-passing to argue that even reductionists can accept the uniqueness of testimonial knowledge, and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • The Moral Obligations of Trust.Paul Faulkner - 2014 - Philosophical Explorations 17 (3):332-345.
    Moral obligation, Darwall argues, is irreducibly second personal. So too, McMyler argues, is the reason for belief supplied by testimony and which supports trust. In this paper, I follow Darwall in arguing that the testimony is not second personal ?all the way down?. However, I go on to argue, this shows that trust is not fully second personal, which in turn shows that moral obligation is equally not second personal ?all the way down?
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Trust Without Reliance.Christopher Thompson - 2017 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 20 (3):643-655.
    A standard view of trust sees trust as intimately related to reliance; on this standard view, trust is reliance plus some other factor. A significant literature has now developed that seeks to explain what factor, in addition to reliance, serves to distinguish cases of trust from cases of mere reliance. I argue that this approach to the analysis of trust is misguided. Although reliance, properly understood, frequently accompanies trust, reliance is not a necessary condition of trust.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Epistemic Self-Trust: It's Personal.Katherine Dormandy - forthcoming - Episteme:1-16.
    What is epistemic self-trust? There is a tension in the way in which prominent accounts answer this question. Many construe epistemic trust in oneself as no more than reliance on our sub-personal cognitive faculties. Yet many accounts – often the same ones – construe epistemic trust in others as a normatively laden attitude directed at persons whom we expect to care about our epistemic needs. Is epistemic self-trust really so different from epistemic trust in others? I argue that it is (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Of Kids and Unicorns: How Rational Is Children's Trust in Testimonial Knowledge?Alexander Lascaux - 2020 - Cognitive Science 44 (3).
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Testimonial Entitlement, Norms of Assertion and Privacy.Philip J. Nickel - 2013 - Episteme 10 (2):207-217.
    According to assurance views of testimonial justification, in virtue of the act of testifying a speaker provides an assurance of the truth of what she asserts to the addressee. This assurance provides a special justificatory force and a distinctive normative status to the addressee. It is thought to explain certain asymmetries between addressees and other unintended hearers (bystanders and eavesdroppers), such as the phenomenon that the addressee has a right to blame the speaker for conveying a falsehood but unintended hearers (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations