Desacuerdos, paridad epistêmica e inchoerencia

Authors

  • Federico Matías Pailos Universidad de Buenos Aires CONICET
  • Pablo Di Paolo Universidad de Buenos Aires CONICET

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5007/1808-1711.2013v17n1p1

Abstract

Conciliatory views on disagreement claim that one should “split the difference” between the epistemic peers’ opinions. Nevertheless, when they apply to the disagreement on conciliatory positions themselves, they give incoherent instructions. A semi-conciliatory position is one that accepts that the peers’ opinions are part of the whole body of evidence relevant in these situations. If one adopts this kind of view, all cases that seems to favor conciliatory views can be explained, and without compromising with the anti–intuitive consequences conciliatory positions have. In particular, a semi-conciliatory view is not condemned to give incoherent instructions when applied to disagreement about it.


Author Biography

Federico Matías Pailos, Universidad de Buenos Aires CONICET

Doctor en Filosofía (Universidad de Buenos Aires)

Investigador Asistente (CONICET)

Jefe de Trabajos Prácticos (Área: Lógica; Departamento de Filosofía; Universidad de Buenos Aires)

Published

2013-04-01

Issue

Section

Articles