I’d like to hear more about this “authority” we trust whose representation of a photo as “factual” is the
only way to generate our belief that it is. (And I’d like to meet him.) Let’s say it’s someone who has no intention to “violate” our trust – one whose credentials enjoy an iron-clad reputation for trustworthiness. Still, can this ideal authority
ever enjoy such perfect knowledge about the facts of a photo to warrant
the only way we can believe in those facts? If they can, is it because they have access to an even higher “Authority” – note the capital “A” – to whom
we have none? Or maybe this authoritative photographer used special instruments of analysis? Makes me think one should be more than “rightly skeptical” about this person.
Bookmarks