Witness Evidence

[jenny1972]

lol ok we shouldnt blindly trust scientists either just because their scientists they might be mad scientists . people who make claims should be scrutinized and evaluated and if people are satisfied they are reliable their testomony should be accepted but not before then . so a credible witness is one who has been evaluated , have any of the witnesses to jesus been evaluated or even have character witnesses vouch for them or anything at all or is it just blind faith in these people who lived over 2000 years ago that we have very very little info about ? why OP do you think they are credible what has led you to that conclusion ?

[Minimalist]

I'd love to cross-examine the mother fuckers.

Reduce them to a puddle of piss without breaking a sweat.

[Thumpalumpacus]

[GrandizerII]

[Minimalist]

Also ignores the fact that witnesses simply lie... like cops on a witness stand.

[bennyboy]

So what strengthens testimony (or the lack of decreases it's worth).  Collaborating testimonies and evidence can verify what a witness reports. As with any evidence multiple pieces that tell the same story are less likely to be in error in the same way.  Time and proximity lessen error.  Familiarity will make a testimony more reliable; we can better recognize what we know.  We may mistake some details in what we remember or some thing may have more focus or less (given the person witnessing and perspective).  But it is rarely completely inaccurate (short of lying).

I'm not saying that witness testimony is the be all... end all.  Any evidence needs to be evaluated in light of all other evidence (pro and con), and in regard to it's strengths and weaknesses. And depending on the circumstances, witness testimony may not be reliable at all.   Even biases or motivation to lie, can be a strength or weakness (or it may be of null value).  It needs to be dealt with given the circumstances and considerations for each account. Hasty generalizations about all testimony and without looking at the facts is both naïve and I believe impossible to live.

Witness testimony can establish what people experience, in a broad sense.  It cannot, however, establish that their assessment of their experiences is correct, no matter how many witnesses make the same assessment.  For example, many people believe God has come into their hearts and "shown them the way."  They had similar emotional experiences, and have drawn similar conclusions.  However, their testimony is garbage, because they have not established any reliable method by which to self-assess their decision-making processes, nor are they able to demonstrate that they've arrived at their conclusion by anything other than wishy-thinking.

[downbeatplumb]

lol ok we shouldnt blindly trust scientists either just because their scientists they might be mad scientists . people who make claims should be scrutinized and evaluated and if people are satisfied they are reliable their testomony should be accepted but not before then . so a credible witness is one who has been evaluated , have any of the witnesses to jesus been evaluated or even have character witnesses vouch for them or anything at all or is it just blind faith in these people who lived over 2000 years ago that we have very very little info about ? why OP do you think they are credible what has led you to that conclusion ?

The witnesses to jesus are characters in a book. That is all. They are as valid as Hermione as a witness to Harry Potter.

[brewer]

I only receive treatment from physicians who base their practice of medicine on testimonial evidence.

[ignoramus]

I won't let anyone give me a heart bypass unless they've seen EVERY episode of McGyver!
I just can't risk it!

[RoadRunner79]

yes thats true we do have to trust in other peoples observations . we trust in the observations of scientists for example , not all eyewitness testomony is accepted as reliable you have to take a good look at the eyewitnesses and take into account their mental state and many other factors to determine the reliability of the testamony . If we have no information about an eyewitness as to their reliability and mental state then that eyewitness testomony shouldnt be trusted ...

LOL.... do scientist have to submit to a phych eval every time they submit their work. 

I generally agree, but where we cannot speak or access directly, then I think we need to rely on those around them.  I also think that collaborating testimony helps here.