{"title":"Evidentialism and Patient Testimony.","authors":"Elisa Reverman","doi":"10.1093/jmp/jhag004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In this article, I argue that patients' testimonial knowledge is assessed with a default evidentialist approach. I primarily support this claim by drawing from work on physicians' accounts of assessing the trustworthiness of patients' testimony. Furthermore, I explicate a three-tiered evidence-ranking approach within these physician accounts and detail how it resembles existing hierarchical evidence-ranking frameworks in medicine. I then discuss the role that aperspectival objectivity plays in this evidentialist approach and highlight some tensions that emerge. Next, I identify some practical, epistemic, and ethical consequences of said evidentialist approach and end on potential strategies for mitigating the potential negative consequences. The account I detail ultimately reveals much of the epistemic complexity surrounding patients' testimonial knowledge as a kind of evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":47377,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medicine and Philosophy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medicine and Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jmp/jhag004","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In this article, I argue that patients' testimonial knowledge is assessed with a default evidentialist approach. I primarily support this claim by drawing from work on physicians' accounts of assessing the trustworthiness of patients' testimony. Furthermore, I explicate a three-tiered evidence-ranking approach within these physician accounts and detail how it resembles existing hierarchical evidence-ranking frameworks in medicine. I then discuss the role that aperspectival objectivity plays in this evidentialist approach and highlight some tensions that emerge. Next, I identify some practical, epistemic, and ethical consequences of said evidentialist approach and end on potential strategies for mitigating the potential negative consequences. The account I detail ultimately reveals much of the epistemic complexity surrounding patients' testimonial knowledge as a kind of evidence.
期刊介绍:
This bimonthly publication explores the shared themes and concerns of philosophy and the medical sciences. Central issues in medical research and practice have important philosophical dimensions, for, in treating disease and promoting health, medicine involves presuppositions about human goals and values. Conversely, the concerns of philosophy often significantly relate to those of medicine, as philosophers seek to understand the nature of medical knowledge and the human condition in the modern world. In addition, recent developments in medical technology and treatment create moral problems that raise important philosophical questions. The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy aims to provide an ongoing forum for the discussion of such themes and issues.