In my weekly article on “Western” philosophy, I discuss about the requisites for testimony. Reductionists (i.e., scholars who think that Linguistic Communication can be reduced to other instruments of knowledge, the usual candidates being memory and inference) tend to have higher requirements for Testimony, but so do also some Non-Reductionists. Do we agree in ending up with that little “sound” testimonial knowledge?
elisa freschi
These pages are a sort of virtual desktop of Elisa Freschi. You can find here my cv and some random thoughts on Sanskrit (and) Philosophy. All criticism welcome! Contributions are also welcome!
Comments and discussions are welcome. Be sure you are making a point and contributing to the discussion.