The Trust Recession

The episodes

Each episode builds on the one before, and the finale hands the question back to you sharper, not settled.

1. 01

   It could be her, it could be a fake

   A late-night phone call in a sister's crying voice, and the realisation that no security question could rule out a good enough fake. The first episode offers no test for detecting forgeries — there is none — and instead uncovers the assumption the panic rests on, that real knowledge is what you check for yourself.

   ▶ Listen Read transcript →
2. 02

   Proportion your belief to the evidence

   David Hume's rule — a wise man proportions his belief to the evidence, and another person's word is evidence only once you have grounds that they are reliable. The episode builds the case for the verify-first instinct as strongly as it can, and holds one question back for the end — not whether you should live this way, but whether anyone can.

   ▶ Listen Read transcript →
3. 03

   Reid's two principles

   Thomas Reid's reply to Hume — nature built us to believe what we are told, and testimony is a basic source of knowledge, like sight, owed belief until something specific breaks it. Hume says trust must be earned; Reid says we start out already owing it. Both pictures of the human knower are left standing, with notice that you cannot keep both.

   ▶ Listen Read transcript →
4. 04

   Name one thing you know by yourself

   An inventory rather than a lecture. The listener is asked to name one important thing they know with nobody's word in it — a birthday, what is in the pill, that the distant war is happening — and watches each dissolve into testimony. One reply is held over for next time — grant that checking everything is impossible, but vet your sources, then trust them.

   ▶ Listen Read transcript →
5. 05

   You can't check the checkers

   C. A. J. Coady closes the last exit — every tool you would use to check a source's reliability was itself built out of trusted testimony, so there is no testimony-free place from which to run the audit. Trust turns out to be not a lazy shortcut but the ground, and the question becomes whom to trust, and how well.

   ▶ Listen Read transcript →
6. 06

   When someone tells you

   Richard Moran's account of assurance — a speaker does not leave evidence lying about like a footprint, but stakes themselves on what they say — and Annette Baier's account of trust as accepted vulnerability. Together they explain why a lie from someone trusted is a betrayal rather than a mere false belief, and what a forged voice counterfeits and cannot supply.

   ▶ Listen Read transcript →
7. 07

   When recordings stop settling it

   For two centuries a recording could catch a liar. Don Fallis and Regina Rini argue that deepfakes remove that backstop, so the deepest harm is not the lies we will believe but the true things we will no longer be able to believe; Joshua Habgood-Coote replies that the backstop never bore that weight. The suspicion is tested rather than settled.

   ▶ Listen Read transcript →
8. 08

   The forced bet

   The final episode brings the four accounts into one room — Hume's verifier, Reid's default trust, Moran's staked assurance, and the failing backstop — and crowns none of them. No test for fakes is offered; what remains is the question of what makes a bet on a person a good one, and what is traded away by refusing to bet at all.

   ▶ Listen Read transcript →

Thinkers

The thinkers and traditions this series draws on:

Related series

• Looks back to 05 · Mind & Machine
• Looks back to 07 · How to Be Good
• Looks back to 08 · Choice & Blame (Free Will)
• Looks back to 10 · Do You Deserve What You Have?

Sources

Written by AI under human direction. This is the reading the series was built from. checked against source means the passage was found in the cited work and a second, independent model checked the episode's use of it; supports in part means that check judged the use a little stronger than the passage alone establishes; passage located means a reader found the passage but it has not had the second check. Unmarked entries are background reading.

• David Hume — An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding (Section X, "Of Miracles") (1748) The chapter where Hume argues a wise person believes in proportion to the evidence, and that another's word counts only as far as experience shows reports usually match the facts. The link is the full text; used here: Section X, "Of Miracles." supports in part
• Robert Chesney and Danielle Keats Citron — Deep Fakes: A Looming Challenge for Privacy, Democracy, and National Security (2019) The law article that coined the term "the liar's dividend": once people know fakes exist, anyone caught on a real recording can say it was faked. Episode 7 names the two authors and the term; Episode 1 uses the idea unnamed. The link is the journal's page for the article. checked against source
• Dan O’Brien — Humeanism and the Epistemology of Testimony (2021) A recent paper on reading Hume as the founder of the view that trusting someone's word comes down to ordinary weighing of evidence, which this series calls reductionism. The link is the author's own copy of the paper.
• Nick Leonard — Epistemological Problems of Testimony (2023) An encyclopedia overview of the argument over whether believing what you are told must rest on your own evidence that the teller is reliable, or is a basic source of knowledge in its own right. It is a summary, not a primary text.
• Elizabeth Fricker — Against Gullibility (1994) Fricker's defence of a careful form of the Humean view: you may believe a speaker, but only while you keep watch for signs that this speaker, on this subject, is not to be trusted. The link is the publisher's page for the chapter.
• Thomas Reid — An Inquiry into the Human Mind on the Principles of Common Sense (1764) Thomas Reid's 1764 reply to Hume: we're built to tell the truth and built to believe what we're told, so belief comes first and needs no proof — only a specific reason is enough to take it back. This links the book itself. checked against source
• Douglas Harper — credit (entry) A dictionary entry tracing the word credit back to the Latin credere, to believe or to entrust, which the series uses to show how trust once meant placing yourself in someone's keeping. It is a reference entry, not a history of the idea. supports in part
• Christopher R. Green — Epistemology of Testimony A free encyclopedia overview of the debate over whether you need your own reasons before believing what you are told, including Coady's argument that checking testimony always relies on more testimony. It is a summary, not a primary text.
• Kola Superdeep Borehole A summary of the deepest hole ever drilled, about 12 kilometres into the Earth's crust, which backs Episode 4's point that no one has ever reached the Earth's interior. It is a reference page, not a scientific paper. supports in part
• C. A. J. Coady — Testimony: A Philosophical Study (1992) Coady's book argues that any check you run on what people tell you depends on other things people told you, so trusting testimony cannot be built up from your own observation alone. The link is the publisher's page for the book. supports in part
• Jennifer Lackey — Learning from Words: Testimony as a Source of Knowledge (2008) A book arguing that trusting what people tell you needs both a reliable speaker and a listener alert to doubt. The series touches this idea in passing when it discusses checking sources, without naming it. Catalogue record.
• Cailin O’Connor, Sanford Goldberg, and Alvin Goldman — Social Epistemology (2026) An encyclopedia entry on how what we know depends on other people, including who gets believed and why. The series marks that question and returns to it later; this is a summary of the field, not the source the episodes are built on.
• Richard Moran — Getting Told and Being Believed (2005) A philosopher's essay on what happens when someone tells you something: not handing over a fact, but giving their word and answering for it. Episode 6 uses this to show why a faked voice can copy that gesture but not truly make it. supports in part
• Richard Moran — The Exchange of Words: Speech, Testimony, and Intersubjectivity (2018) Richard Moran argues that when someone tells you something, they're not just handing you a clue — they're giving you their word and taking responsibility for it. Episode 6 uses this to explain why being lied to by someone you trust feels different from just being wrong. The link goes to a review of the book, not the book itself.
• Paul Faulkner — Knowledge on Trust (2011) Faulkner's book on how we come to know things by trusting what others tell us, developing the idea that a speaker gives an assurance the listener accepts. The link is the publisher's page.
• Paul Faulkner — The Presumption of Assurance (2021) A later paper in which Faulkner defends and revises the idea that telling someone something is giving them an assurance. The link is a catalogue record.
• Philip J. Nickel — Assurance Views of Testimony (2019) A handbook chapter surveying the view that telling is an invitation to trust, not a piece of evidence — background to Episode 6's account of assurance, developed there through Moran and Faulkner. The link is the author's own preprint, not the published chapter.
• Annette Baier — Trust and Antitrust (1986) Baier's essay argues trust means knowingly leaving something you care about in someone's hands, relying on their goodwill — which is why broken trust feels like betrayal, not mere disappointment. A catalogue record; the essay itself is in the journal Ethics. supports in part
• J. Adam Carter and Mona Simion — The Ethics and Epistemology of Trust A free encyclopedia overview of what trust is, including Baier's idea of trust as reliance on someone's goodwill and the difference between trusting a person and relying on a tool. It is a summary, not a primary text.
• Don Fallis — The Epistemic Threat of Deepfakes (2021) Fallis's paper arguing that once convincing fake videos are possible, even genuine recordings carry less information, because a video no longer reliably shows that the event happened. The link is the journal page. supports in part
• Regina Rini — Deepfakes and the Epistemic Backstop (2020) Rini's paper arguing that recordings have quietly kept public speech honest, by catching liars and by making them fear being caught, and that deepfakes threaten that check. The link is the free journal text. supports in part
• Joshua Habgood-Coote — Deepfakes and the Epistemic Apocalypse (2023) Habgood-Coote's reply to the alarm over deepfakes: fakes are not new, recordings were always believed because people and institutions vouched for them, and the panic may do more harm than the fakes. The link is the open-access journal text.
• Censorship of images in the Soviet Union An overview of how Soviet officials altered photographs to remove people who had fallen from favour, the historical case Episode 7 uses to show that faked images are not new. It is a summary; David King's book The Commissar Vanishes (1997) collects the pictures themselves. supports in part

Where to start

• David Hume — An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding (1748) Start with Section 10, 'Of Miracles', where Hume argues that believing what someone tells you is really a bet on how often reports like theirs have turned out true. It is the oldest and plainest version of the demand to check everything before you believe it, and the link is the full book, free to read.
• Onora O'Neill — A Question of Trust (the 2002 Reith Lectures) (2002) Five short broadcast lectures, written to be listened to, on why demanding more proof, more audits and more transparency does not give us back the trust we think we have lost. It is the gentlest way into the question these episodes ask, and the link is the lectures themselves.
• Joshua Habgood-Coote — Deepfakes and the epistemic apocalypse (2023) A free, readable paper arguing that the panic about fake video is overblown, and that the real danger is people talking themselves out of believing anything at all. Read it after the last episode to see the contemporary fight being had in print; the link is the whole paper.