Reductionism or Non-Reductionism in Epistemology of Transmitted Evidence

One of the most fundamental issues concerning epistemology of the transmitted evidence is that whether or not the transmitted evidence depends upon other sources [of knowledge]. Those who advocate dependence of the transmitted evidence who are called reductionists are of the opinion that the validity of transmitted evidence depends upon the proving argument. On the contrary, those who advocate independence who are called non- reductionists are of the opinion that justification for the transmitted evidence is an independent one. In the present article, while studying the most important arguments provided by each of the above two groups, the author will discuss the relations between these arguments and ideas presented by the scholars of the Principle of Jurisprudence. The methodology employed by the author in this article is an analytic-documentary one.