"Testimony should be a philosophical problem and not limited to legal or historical contexts where it refers to the account of a witness who reports what he has seen"
About this Quote
Ricoeur pushes testimony from the court and the archive into the center of philosophy by asking how truth passes from one person to another through a word that seeks belief. A witness does more than report facts; he performs an act. Saying "I was there" or "Believe me" is a pledge that binds the speaker ethically and invites the listener into a relationship of trust, doubt, and verification. Testimony therefore raises questions about knowledge, responsibility, and selfhood that cannot be settled by procedures alone.
Across his hermeneutic project, especially in Oneself as Another and Memory, History, Forgetting, Ricoeur names this pledge attestation: the fragile yet courageous claim "I can" and "I attest" that mediates between certainty and suspicion. Testimony is a mode of attestation by which a self presents itself as trustworthy. Because words can fail, memories can err, and speakers can lie, testimony becomes a philosophical problem of criteria and reception. How do we weigh someone’s word? What balance of trust and critique honors both the vulnerability of the witness and the demands of truth? Institutions such as courts and disciplines such as history are indispensable, but they presuppose these deeper issues of credibility, narrative coherence, and the ethics of memory.
Ricoeur also shows that testimony is constitutive of personal and collective identity. We tell ourselves and others who we are by narrating what we have lived, promising and owning our deeds. In traumatic histories, such as the Shoah, testimony resists full verification and yet obligates acknowledgement; it summons a listener capable of justice. The philosophical stakes are thus intersubjective and political: testimony builds and repairs the shared world by creating bonds of recognition, while inviting critique to guard against manipulation and forgetting. To treat testimony philosophically is to see it as a practice where truth, trust, and narrative meet, where the self risks its word before others, and where communities learn how to remember rightly.
Across his hermeneutic project, especially in Oneself as Another and Memory, History, Forgetting, Ricoeur names this pledge attestation: the fragile yet courageous claim "I can" and "I attest" that mediates between certainty and suspicion. Testimony is a mode of attestation by which a self presents itself as trustworthy. Because words can fail, memories can err, and speakers can lie, testimony becomes a philosophical problem of criteria and reception. How do we weigh someone’s word? What balance of trust and critique honors both the vulnerability of the witness and the demands of truth? Institutions such as courts and disciplines such as history are indispensable, but they presuppose these deeper issues of credibility, narrative coherence, and the ethics of memory.
Ricoeur also shows that testimony is constitutive of personal and collective identity. We tell ourselves and others who we are by narrating what we have lived, promising and owning our deeds. In traumatic histories, such as the Shoah, testimony resists full verification and yet obligates acknowledgement; it summons a listener capable of justice. The philosophical stakes are thus intersubjective and political: testimony builds and repairs the shared world by creating bonds of recognition, while inviting critique to guard against manipulation and forgetting. To treat testimony philosophically is to see it as a practice where truth, trust, and narrative meet, where the self risks its word before others, and where communities learn how to remember rightly.
Quote Details
| Topic | Truth |
|---|
More Quotes by Paul
Add to List
