Effective Filtering

Language Comprehension and Testimonial Entitlement

Bibliographic Data

ID4826426
AuthorsJ P Grodniewicz (0000-0001-7788-4236, Jagiellonian University, corresponding author)
Year2023
Volume74
Issue1
Pages291-311
Publication date2023-12-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueThe Philosophical Quarterly (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0031-8094 • E-ISSN: 1467-9213
PublisherOxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1093/pq/pqac064
OpenAlexW4301390713
LanguageEN
Citations received3
References cited68

It is often suggested that we are equipped with a set of cognitive tools that help us to filter out unreliable testimony. But are these tools effective? I answer this question in two steps. Firstly, I argue that they are not real-time effective. The process of filtering, which takes place simultaneously with or right after language comprehension, does not prevent a particular hearer on a particular occasion from forming beliefs based on false testimony. Secondly, I argue that they are long-term effective. Some hearers sometimes detect false testimony, which increases speakers' incentives for honesty and stabilizes the practice of human communication in which deception is risky and costly. In short, filtering prevents us from forming a large number of beliefs based on false testimony, not by turning each of us into a high-functioning polygraph but by turning the social environment of human communication into one in which such polygraphs are not required. Finally, I argue that these considerations support strong anti-reductionism about testimonial entitlement

Business · Cognitive psychology · Comprehension · Entitlement (fair division · Epistemology · Filter (signal processing · Honesty · Linguistics · Process (computing · Set (abstract data type · Testimonial · Computer Science · Deception detection and forensic psychology · Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics · Misinformation and Its Impacts · Philosophy · Psychology · Social Psychology

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access