Nonconciliation in Peer Disagreement: Its Phenomenology and Its Rationality

Henderson, David; Horgan, Terry; Potrč, Matjaž; Tierney, Hannah

doi:10.1163/18756735-000015

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…9 The discussion of peer disagreement and testimony in philosophy deserves much more space than can be afforded here. Readers worried that my point about peer disagreement is self-defeating should see (Everett, 2014;Henderson et al, 2017;Kornblith, 2013;van Inwagen, 2010) for a sampling of the different ways around the challenge of peer disagreement in philosophy.…”

Section: Philosophical Progress Without Testimonymentioning

confidence: 99%

Philosophical producers, philosophical consumers, and the metaphilosophical value of original texts

Landes

2022

Philos Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, two competing methodological frameworks have developed in the study of the epistemology of philosophy. The traditional camp, led by experimental philosophy and its allies, has made inferences about the epistemology of philosophy based on the reactions, or intuitions, people have to works of philosophy. In contrast, multiple authors have followed the lead of Deutsch and Cappelen by setting aside experimental data in favor of inferences based on careful examination of the text of notable works of philosophy. In other words, the debate is split between authors focusing on philosophy’s consumption and those focusing on philosophy’s production. This paper examines the motivation for focusing on original texts and other evidence of philosophy’s production and finds it lacking. Drawing upon Hills’ distinction between propagation and transmission, I argue that the social epistemology of philosophy does not justify the recent focus on original texts of philosophy. Because the philosophical knowledge of consumers of philosophy is likely inspired by producers of philosophy, as opposed to epistemically grounded in the producers’ epistemic states, experimental philosophy had it right all along—if we want to know the epistemic standing of philosophy, we need to look to philosophy’s consumers.

show abstract

Section: Philosophical Progress Without Testimonymentioning

confidence: 99%

Philosophical producers, philosophical consumers, and the metaphilosophical value of original texts

Landes

2022

Philos Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Odziv, ki ga bomo zagovarjali, se v veliki meri opira na izkustvene razlike med primeri preprostega seštevanja ter primeri filozofskih, verskih ali pa političnih prepričanj. Da bi to razliko lahko vzpostavili, si lahko pomagamo z razlikovanjem med globalnim in lokalnim spoznavnim vrstnikom (Henderson et al 2017). Pri obeh vrstah nestrinjanja drugega razumemo kot globalnega spoznavnega vrstnika -torej kot približno enako razumnega, za dokazila občutljivega, natančnega ipd.…”

Section: Etika Prepričanja In Problem Nestrinjanjaunclassified

Identiteta, etika prepričanja, razumnost in resonanca

Strahovnik¹

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Povzetek: Prispevek 1 se ukvarja z vprašanji spoznavnih dokazil za naša prepričanja oz. etiko prepričanj, pri čemer se podrobneje posveča problematiki nestrinjanja. Kaj obstoj nestrinjanja med menoj in drugim pomeni za razumnost sprejemanja prepričanja, ki je predmet tega nestrinjanja? Tu zagovarjamo stališče, da zgolj obstoj takšnega nestrinjanja ne pomeni nujno, da je (najbolj ali celo edino) razumno naše prepričanje opustiti -zlasti v primeru verskih prepričanj. To tezo lahko opremo na izhodiščno raven razumnosti, ki jo poimenujemo izkustvena razumnost in ki v veliki meri vključuje tudi spoznavna dokazila, ki jih ne moremo nujno izrecno ubesediti ali posredovati. In prav ta v položaju nestrinjanja pogosto igrajo pomembno vlogo. Obenem pa je ta tema povezana z mislijo Hartmuta Rosa, posebej njegovo teorijo resonance in tezo o oblikah novih identitet, ki so posledica družbene pohitritve časa. Te so zelo pomembne tudi z vidika posameznikovih prepričanj ter razumnosti. Teorija resonance ponuja tudi nastavke za razumevanje vidika, da je nestrinjanje inherentni gradnik resonance -in ne nekaj, kar bi slednja izključevala ali odpravljala. Ob koncu na tej podlagi oblikujemo tudi novo osvetlitev nekaterih izzivov sodobnega časa, kot so spoznavni mehurčki, odmevne komore in spoznavni vidiki identitetne politike.

show abstract

“…His arguments can be applied to a recent topic of whether one should trust in peer reviewers when they made their counterarguments against our encouragement in our well-built arguments. For example, a recent article from Henderson, Horgan, Potrč, and Tierney argues for a possibility of retaining confirmation of belief in a proposition against peerhood by means of epistemic phenomenology (Henderson, Horgan, Potrč, and Tierney, 2017). Additionally, Lampert and Biro argue that Richard Feldman's principle of hyper-evidence from reviewers is just wrong and cannot be counted as truly impartial between two sides of an argument (Lampert and Biro, 2017).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%