more on this theme | more from this thinker
Full Idea
Far from guaranteeing a high likelihood of truth by itself, testimonial agreement can apparently do so only if the circumstances are favourable as regards independence, prior probability, and individual credibility.
Gist of Idea
Mere agreement of testimonies is not enough to make truth very likely
Source
Erik J. Olsson (Against Coherence [2005], 1)
Book Ref
Olsson,Erik J.: 'Against Coherence' [OUP 2008], p.2
A Reaction
This is Olson's main thesis. His targets are C.I.Lewis and Bonjour, who hoped that a mere consensus of evidence would increase verisimilitude. I don't see a problem for coherence in general, since his favourable circumstances are part of it.
| 21496 | Mere agreement of testimonies is not enough to make truth very likely [Olsson] |
| 21515 | Incoherence may be more important for enquiry than coherence [Olsson] |
| 21499 | Coherence is only needed if the information sources are not fully reliable [Olsson] |
| 21502 | A purely coherent theory cannot be true of the world without some contact with the world [Olsson] |
| 21512 | Extending a system makes it less probable, so extending coherence can't make it more probable [Olsson] |
| 21514 | Coherence is the capacity to answer objections [Olsson] |