Testimony, reason And rationality
ABSTRACT
Testimony
is defined as a statement or declaration given under oath in a court of law or
the sharing information about a religious experience. When evidence is reliably accepted by a person, beliefs are gained
through it. In modern society, many of a person's beliefs are directly
derived from evidence or other beliefs derived in this way. It is used as
a philosophical fact about giving evidence. The primary focus of the philosophy
of witnessing is scientifically. The broad interest in the topic
reflects the centrality of reasoning in human affairs. It also implies
that in order to gain a broad understanding of logic, one must focus on the
various projects and tasks related to it.
Keywords: Testimony, Evidence, empirical
1. Introduction
Testimony is believing someone when they make acclaim, and
believing them because we think they know what they are talking about and are
telling the truth. Testimony is important for most of what we actually know is
accepted on the testimony of others. We don’t often get the chance to test the
truth of what is told to us and yet we base outer life on these things. As well
as even scientists accept what others say is so to build new knowledge. Acknowledging
the complete reliance on past credible evidence in our credible system seems to
place a pressure on a correlation based on the justification of our empirical
beliefs. A description of how beliefs derived from evidence can be
justified and awareness cannot be temporarily described. To be
convincing, it must be a general concept of justified beliefs and the
application of conditions to knowledge.
Because some criteria that can be considered good logic are
often silent, those who follow the evaluation project aim to determine to what
extent human reasoning conforms to the hypothetical standard. Ordinary
people do not have the underlying logical ability to handle a wide range of
logical tasks, so they have to exploit a simple heuristic collection that can
be subject to serious anti-normative patterns that are either logical or
biased.
2. CONTEXT
It is important to understand the process of understanding
what is being said and to have faith in the speaker. This includes a concept of
the nature of various speech verbs, including expressions.
This general concept of the link of evidence shows us that
the narrator is sincere (believes what is said) and if your belief is true then
what someone says (what someone says) is true. Adult listeners find new
opportunities to witness with all of this in their cognitive background; This,
in turn, is a further empirical knowledge of human nature, which, in
particular, is prone to lying and honest error. There are two mechanisms
by which blind faith can change a listener's response and focus broadly.
In fact, cognitive data will interact with background beliefs in this
monitoring process. If a trust is built without an assessment, the
speaker assumes without evidence that it is trustworthy.
Knowledge and justification can come in one direction:
a reasonable belief in what someone is saying may fail to be knowledgeable,
because even if the belief is false, or true, it is based on falsehood, but it
is a just belief. Possession of sufficient territory, logo, subject for
her faith, we regard it as an essential condition to have knowledge-evidence
beliefs and elsewhere. This shows that there is a difference in the
issues of knowledge and the reasons for sufficient confidence.
To know what someone has been told, one must be able
to gain an understanding of the generation of one's faith. This means
that one has the ability to defend one's statement by quoting what has been
said.
.
3. PRAGMATIC OBJECTIONS
According to Gigenser, we cannot draw conclusions from
experiments on human reasoning. People seem to argue in a logical way. No
standard principle is violated as the subjects understand the work. For
the performance of logical tasks to improve, it must be certain that the
activism of the people is problematic. In which case, for the statement
that continuous performance improves performance Warranted, it must also be an
opportunity for us to be justified in maintaining it.
4.
CONCLUSION
In philosophy,
testimony is a proposition conveyed by one entity to another entity, whether
through speech or writing or through facial expression, that is based on the
entity's knowledge base. The proposition believed on the basis of a
testimony is justified if conditions are met which assess, among other things,
the speaker's reliability and the hearer's possession of positive reasons.
Reason
has thus become a perilous faculty without firm ground, without a net, without
ultimate security. For this, you could also say Reason declines every (all too
comfortable) exposition of itself as being rationality. Its enduring claim is
to bring about clarifications through the transitional activity of a
reason apprehended as reason.
REFERENCES
[1]
https:www.slideserve.com/penney/belief-in-god-s-testimony
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testimony.
No comments:
Post a Comment