the Evidence-Based Argument in Peer Disagreement
نویسندگان
چکیده
The problem of disagreement is one the most important issues that have been debated in epistemology recent years, and particular peer disagreement. main question this what kind attitude we should rationally adopt when realize someone who an epistemic to us does not think same. There are four responses question: conciliationism, steadfastness, total evidence view, justificationist view. According there a disagreement, parties give equal weight each other's beliefs, lower their confidence own beliefs or suspend judgments on issue question. steadfastness can continue maintain one's belief, rational. In with peer; consists his belief peer, which before based. For reason, according Kelly, owner it may be reasonable place more if original supports than peer. degree your prior justification for proposition determines response it; namely, you high as but do justification, need revise article, first I will briefly examine these views deal points where they fail satisfy. Later, argue resolution case-based. And finally, present evidence-based argument my explain sample cases.
منابع مشابه
Peer Disagreement and Total Evidence
······································································································· 3
متن کاملQuantifying disagreement in argument-based reasoning
An argumentation framework can be seen as expressing, in an abstract way, the conflicting information of an underlying logical knowledge base. This conflicting information often allows for the presence of more than one possible reasonable position (extension/labelling) which one can take. A relevant question, therefore, is how much these positions differ from each other. In the current paper, w...
متن کاملDo computer simulations support the Argument from Disagreement?
According to the Argument from Disagreement (AD) widespread and persistent disagreement on ethical issues indicates that our moral opinions are not influenced by moral facts, either because there are no such facts or because there are such facts but they fail to influence ourmoral opinions. In an innovative paper, Gustafsson and Peterson (Synthese, published online 16October, 2010) study the ar...
متن کاملA computer simulation of the argument from disagreement
In this paper we shed new light on the Argument from Disagreement by putting it to test in a computer simulation. According to this argument widespread and persistent disagreement on ethical issues indicate that our moral opinions are not influenced by any moral facts, either because no such facts exist or because they are epistemically inaccessible or inefficacious for some other reason. Our s...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
ژورنال
عنوان ژورنال: Dini ara?t?rmalar
سال: 2021
ISSN: ['1301-966X', '2602-2435']
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15745/da.990404