Abstract

Given that testimony is a fundamental and fundamentally reliable source of information, having a status akin to perception and memory in our fabric of understanding, then questions arise about how to comprehend those categories of testimony that seem inherently misleading. Some of these are the ‘pathologies of testimony’ discussed in this chapter: gossip, rumour, and urban myth. It is argued that philosophers have paid insufficient attention to the phenomenology of these three and that what has been said suffers from certain defects. The chapter explores both the conceptual structure of gossip, rumour, and urban myth, and the social and moral significance that they have. It concludes with comment on the epistemic value (and dis-value) of such pathologies.