Recently, I reviewed Casey R. Johnson’s excellent book, Epistemic Care, for the SERRC; Professor Johnson and I have since, in these pages, engaged in the sort of pleasant exchange that makes one…| Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective
I recently wrote a paper—“Caveat Auditor: Epistemic Trust and Conflicts of Interest” (2022)—arguing that a testifier’s incentives are epistemically relevant to our trust in them. People often have incentives to testify in ways that are at odds with the truth or their evidence, and sometimes they even have incentives to get you to believe what’s false or evidentially baseless. Those incentives are typically more important than a testifier’s expertise or knowledge. If you had to c...| Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective
Mark D. West has written a very helpful review (2024) of my recent book, Epistemic Care: Vulnerability, Inquiry, and Social Epistemology. I appreciate the review and this opportunity to respond to it. I agree with much of what West says in the review—questions of autonomy, independence, and obligation are central to understanding communities of inquiry and the duties incumbent upon their members. In this response, I aim to clarify a couple of issues brought to light by West’s comments and...| Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective
Abstract| Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective
Book Review contributions are single-authored or multiple-authored reviews of recent books in the area of social epistemology.| Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective
An Epistemic Phylakes? Regarding Johnson’s Epistemic Care, Mark D. West| Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective
Epistemic Interdependence: A Response to West, Casey R. Johnson| Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective
