Learning objectives
To deepen the philosophical reflection on the topic of language and its relations with knowledge by testimony.
To acquire the ability to present and critically discuss philosophical texts.
To acquire the ability to write a philosophical text.
Course unit content
Language and testimony II
Full programme
Title of the course: "Language and testimony II"
Testimony plays a crucial role in the acquistion of knowledge, let it be linguistic, or historical, of forensic evidence, or of maths and science. Its epistemological status, however, has given rise to heated debates, e.g. whether testimony is a source of basic knowledge (like perception) or not; if and to what an extent it undermines the ideal of a subject's epistemic autonomy; how it connects to the notion of trust, which, in its turn, plays a crucial role among the presuppositions of communication and language acquisition; who counts as a reliable and authoritative witness and why; how it can degenerate in pathological forms such as gossip, rumour or urban myth.
The course will comprise also some methodological classes on how to write a philosophy paper.
Bibliography
Reductionism/anti-reductionism/compatibilism:
One essay between:
a) Fricker, E. “The epistemology of testimony”, Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 61, 1987, pp. 57-83 (Available in DOLLY)
b) Audi, R. “Testimony, credulity and veracity”, in J. Lackey and E. Sosa (eds.) The Epistemology of Testimony, Oxford, OUP, 2006, pp. 25-49.
One essay between:
a) Lackey, J. “It takes two to tango: beyond reductionism and non-reductionism in epistemology”, in J. Lackey and E. Sosa (a cura di) The Epistemology of Testimony, Oxford, OUP, 2006, pp. 160-189.
b) Pritchard, D. “A defence of quasi-reductionism in the epistemology of testimony”, Philosophica 78, 2006, pp. 13-28 (Available in DOLLY).
One essay between:
a) Faulkner, P. “Telling and trusting”, Mind 116/464, 2007, pp. 875-900 (Available in DOLLY)
b) McDowell, J. “Knowledge by hearsay”, in Meaning, Knowledge and Reality, Cambridge (Mass.), Harvard University Press, 1998, pp. 414-443.
Pathologies of testimony and epistemic autonomy:
One essay between:
a) Coady, C. A. J. “Pathologies of testimony. Gossip, rumour and urban myth”, in J. Lackey and E. Sosa (eds.) The Epistemology of Testimony, Oxford, OUP, 2006, pp. 253-271.
b) Fricker, E. “Testimony and epistemic autonomy”, in J. Lackey and E. Sosa (eds.) The Epistemology of Testimony, Oxford, OUP, 2006, pp. 225-250.
Trust and epistemic (in)justice:
One essay between:
a) Moran, R. “Getting told and being believed”, Philosophers’ Imprint 5/5, 2005, (Available in DOLLY).
b) Fricker, M. Epistemic Injustice. Power and Ethics of Knowing, Oxford, OUP, 2007, chapter 1.
Commentaries
Lackey, J. “Introduction”, ”, in J. Lackey and E. Sosa (eds.) The Epistemology of Testimony, Oxford, OUP, 2006, pp. 1-21.
Adler, J. 2012 “Epistemological problems of testimony”, Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/testimony-episprob/
Teaching methods
Lectures and seminars (which require previous reading of assigned material)
Assessment methods and criteria
For those who attend at least 75% of classes: one essay (in English) of 3,000 words (without bibliographical references) on a topic of one's choosing *among the ones dealt with in class* .
For those who take both modules: either two essays of 3,000 words each, on two topics of one's choosing *among the ones dealt with in class*, the second essay must be in English; or else, an essay of 6,000 words (without bibliographical references) on a topic of one's choosing, *among the ones dealt with in class*, in English.
For those who do not attend at least 75% of classes: an oral examination (in English), on the whole programme.
Other information
1. Knowledge and understanding of the philosophical texts in the syllabus, of the main themes dealt with during the course, and of philosophical terminology (in English).
2.Ability to apply knowledge and understanding so as to be able to explain the texts and main themes dealt with during the course and to do so in English.
3.Judgement autonomy: learn to evaluate the soundness of the arguments put forward by the authors to support
their philosophical theses and to do so in English.
4. Communicative abilities: they will be improved with respect to (i) the ability of clearly and concisely presenting the main themes dealt with during the course;(ii) the ability to assess the soundness of the arguments put forward by the authors to maintain their philosophical perspectives; and (iii) the ability to present one's own point of view with respect to the course topics; and to do so in English.
5.Learning abilities: acquisition of the main methodological tools to be employed in the study and the analysis of philosophical texts and themes, as well as in the production of philosophical texts.
