Local Reductionist Claim Summary

1117 Words3 Pages

The topic I wish to pursue for my thesis is to refute the Local Reductionist Claim made by Elizabeth Fricker when evaluating how social identity, specifically how being a member of a minority group, affects credibility of testimony. In doing so, I will expand upon Linda Alcoff’s focus on why an epistemic assessment of what constitutes testimonial knowledge in forming beliefs is important to look at in a social context. I will argue against Fricker’s claim that the hearer should hold all the power to decide whether the testimony from the speaker is a source of knowledge as the local reductionist claim states because it allows for bias to influence the judgement of the hearer and does not allow for true transmission of knowledge via testimony. Fricker, in …show more content…

Alcoff discusses whether social identity is relevant to epistemic assessment, but does not evaluate under what conditions social identity is relevant in. I wish to assess Alcoff’s issue regarding social identity in terms of testimony specifically as a source of knowledge, as well as lay out some criteria that are necessary for epistemic credibility. I will do this while discussing why the reductionist view is faulty because it allows for bias from the hearer when in reality, reliability of knowledge from a person who is in a minority group should not be diminished due to their social identity. Instead, I want to research the balance of power that is granted towards both hearer and speaker when the speaker is testifying.When testimony as a source of knowledge is applied to the daily life, I believe the credibility of the speaker is reduced when the speaker is in a marginalized group. What conditions must be met by both parties for justified belief to be imparted in a social context? My aim is that the final product answers all of these

Open Document