C. A. J. Coady’s justification of natural testimony is examined. It is seen to consist in a Davidsonian argument for individual credibility combined with a Lewis-style coherence argument. It is argued that Coady misconstrues the role of what he calls cohesion (dependence) between information sources and that his invocation of coherence fares no better than Lewis’s own. Finally, an ambiguity is pointed out that is no less fatal than the equivocation that which Coady finds in David Hume.
Keywords: C. A. J. Coady; coherence; cohesion; Davidson; David Hume; independence; justification of testimony
Chapter. 6239 words.
Full text: subscription required