Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Against CoherenceTruth, Probability, and Justification$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Erik J. Olsson

Print publication date: 2005

Print ISBN-13: 9780199279999

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: July 2005

DOI: 10.1093/0199279993.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2018. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).date: 10 December 2018

C. A. J. Coady's Radical Justification of Natural Testimony

C. A. J. Coady's Radical Justification of Natural Testimony

(p.77) 5 C. A. J. Coady's Radical Justification of Natural Testimony
Against Coherence

Erik J. Olsson

Oxford University Press

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

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .