Abstract

The presumption of first-person authority suggests that social scientists might take an informant’s sincere self-ascriptions at face value. However, in cases involving irrational belief-formation or akrasia, it might be difficult to square an informant’s sincere self-ascriptions with observations of his conduct, casting doubts about their accuracy or correctness. This paper discusses the scope and role played by first-person authority in interpretation, offers an account of when, and why, counter-evidence available to the perspective of an interpreter defeats sincere self-ascriptions of belief, and finally asks whether defeating an informant’s self-ascriptions is compatible with ethical guidelines for social scientific research.