Nancy Nyquist Potter Department of Philosophy University of Louisville

‘Is there anybody out there?’ Testimony of minor-attracted persons and hearing versus listening to their voices Nancy Nyquist Potter Department of Philosophy University of Louisville President, Association for the Advancement of Philosophy and Psychiatry nancy.potter@louisville.edu

Outline • Statement of the problem • Testimony and testimonial injustice • The virtue of properly attending to others’ voices • Speakers’ virtues • Concluding remarks--science and EBP

I. Statement of the problem • ‘Pedophiliacs’ are notorious liars • The virtues tied to science • The DSM is deeply influential • It relies on evidence, especially from RCT, yet discounts testimony. • Science that discounts the evidence of testimony is ‘bad science’

Is it just me, or is placing the role of defining the whole of normative sexual behaviour in our society in the hands of a workgroup that only references three sources (all written by the work group head) a problem?’

II. Testimony • Criteria for credibility • General plausibility • In a position to know • Doesn’t have an interest in deceiving • Objectively determined

Testimonial injustice • Hearing, but not properly listening • Results in distorted beliefs • Prejudice and unwarranted assumptions

III. The virtue of the good hearer How did the council meeting go? Were they receptive to your ideas?’ ‘No, it was like talking to a wall. I didn’t get any uptake at all.’

Critical consciousness • Uptake • Trust

IV. Speakers’ virtues • Accuracy • Sincerity • Trustworthiness

Trust as reciprocal • Trusting the listener • Listener trusting the speaker

V. Conclusions • JS Mill and pursuit of truth

The believing game • Appropriate listening (‘uptake’) as necessary to science and DSM-V

Nancy Nyquist Potter nancy.potter@louisville.edu

Nancy Nyquist Potter Department of Philosophy University of Louisville