I will argue that through the justification of memory, trust in others and testimony can also be justified. If we can logically defend believing in our own memories, the we should find the justification of the accounts of others along the way. The main points I will discuss will be the “dualistic theory”, the Reductionist Theory(RT), and other viewpoints from a more personal perspective. The “dualistic theory” helps to provide a degree of justification for the original belief and the act of remembering it. The degree of justification one has for a belief depends on the amount of justification one had in acquiring the original belief and also the amount of justification one has in the preservation of said belief. Another theory pertaining to
…show more content…
Defeaters include the admittance that one’s memory is not perfect and/or that one is not sure that their memory of a particular occurrence is correct. This is recognized with the different degrees of justification. The justification is not cancelled out over time, the degree of justification just decreases (Huemer, The Problem of Memory).
As the “dualistic theory” assists in the justification of one’s memory beliefs, the RT attempts to defend beliefs in the testimonies of others. The RT states that the reliance on another’s testimony is acceptable if one finds the person the testimony was acquired from reliable due to personal observation and checking their reliability. There are two main points to the RT and they include that we can either rely on our own observations to assume the reliability of another or we can rely on an outside party’s testimony on the reliability of the other person (Coady, Testimony and …show more content…
This will tie back to our memories though, so we will have to believe what we have previously observed of their actions and testimonies old and new. It is possible to keep a very detailed record of all that happens pertaining to their previous testimonies, but that will only be relevant if one believes in what they recall of the past incidents and it coincides well with what is written. Although, if it does, that could be crucial to providing a substantially high degree of justification in believing the person’s
Defeaters include the admittance that one’s memory is not perfect and/or that one is not sure that their memory of a particular occurrence is correct. This is recognized with the different degrees of justification. The justification is not cancelled out over time, the degree of justification just decreases (Huemer, The Problem of Memory).
As the “dualistic theory” assists in the justification of one’s memory beliefs, the RT attempts to defend beliefs in the testimonies of others. The RT states that the reliance on another’s testimony is acceptable if one finds the person the testimony was acquired from reliable due to personal observation and checking their reliability. There are two main points to the RT and they include that we can either rely on our own observations to assume the reliability of another or we can rely on an outside party’s testimony on the reliability of the other person (Coady, Testimony and …show more content…
This will tie back to our memories though, so we will have to believe what we have previously observed of their actions and testimonies old and new. It is possible to keep a very detailed record of all that happens pertaining to their previous testimonies, but that will only be relevant if one believes in what they recall of the past incidents and it coincides well with what is written. Although, if it does, that could be crucial to providing a substantially high degree of justification in believing the person’s