Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Two Arguments from Disagreement
View through CrossRef
This chapter criticizes two disagreement arguments for pessimism. The first, due to David Chalmers, asserts on empirical grounds that there is no large collective convergence to, or agreement on, the truth on the big questions of philosophy. The second, inspired by Peter van Inwagen, asserts that disagreement in philosophy is of a certain special epistemological kind, viz., it rationally requires suspension of judgement, at least in many cases; hence progress is impossible. The existence of ‘epistemic peers’ as a condition of suspension of judgement is discussed. It is suggested that neither argument is persuasive. The chapter ends by asking whether any argument from disagreement may succeed.
Title: Two Arguments from Disagreement
Description:
This chapter criticizes two disagreement arguments for pessimism.
The first, due to David Chalmers, asserts on empirical grounds that there is no large collective convergence to, or agreement on, the truth on the big questions of philosophy.
The second, inspired by Peter van Inwagen, asserts that disagreement in philosophy is of a certain special epistemological kind, viz.
, it rationally requires suspension of judgement, at least in many cases; hence progress is impossible.
The existence of ‘epistemic peers’ as a condition of suspension of judgement is discussed.
It is suggested that neither argument is persuasive.
The chapter ends by asking whether any argument from disagreement may succeed.
Related Results
General Conclusion
General Conclusion
Some general remarks are given about methods of argument in metaphysics. The importance of indispensability arguments, and the importance of the fact that such arguments don’t succ...
Reply to Alex Davies
Reply to Alex Davies
Davies casts the idea of occasion-sensitivity in a different form than any I have given it. He offers a new and original perspective on the phenomena. It helps in making issues cle...
Massive Modularity
Massive Modularity
The objective of the article is to discuss the evolution, hypothesis, and some the more prominent arguments for massive modularity (MM). MM is the hypothesis that the human mind is...
Multiple Interpretations of Rationality in Offender Decision Making
Multiple Interpretations of Rationality in Offender Decision Making
It is argued that, contrary to some criticisms, rational choice theory of criminal decision making has and should have a clear place for emotions as part of the decision-making pro...
Between Desire and Reason
Between Desire and Reason
Respect for and promotion of human rights have come to be seen as the basis of legitimacy of modern Western civilization. There is nevertheless a striking contrast between our comm...
Negotiations
Negotiations
This chapter looks at real-life embodied social dynamics between the members of a jazz quartet as they work to record an album in a professional studio. The study is based on audio...
Reading Continental Philosophy and the History of Thought
Reading Continental Philosophy and the History of Thought
This book frames the mission of the Continental Philosophy and History of Thought series at Lexington Books. International leading scholars contribute essays that explore and redef...
Arguments and Agreement
Arguments and Agreement
Abstract
This book brings together new work by leading syntactic theorists from the USA and Europe on a central aspect of syntactic and morphological theory: it expl...