Conciliationism Explained

Conciliationism is a view in the epistemology of disagreement according to which one should revise one's opinions closer to one's epistemic peers in the face of epistemic disagreement. Nathan Ballantyne and E.J. Coffman define the view as follows:[1]

Conciliationism: In a revealed peer disagreement over P, each thinker should give at least some weight to her peer’s attitude. That is, each thinker’s confidence should change to some extent: neither thinker is justified in staying exactly as confident as she initially was regarding whether P.

Philosopher David Christensen has been a prominent defender of this view.[2] [3] Others have argued in its favor as well.[4] Some have discussed the implications of this view for religious belief.[5]

A standard objection is that conciliationism is self-undermining because most philosophers do not accept it.[6] A number of responses have been offered.[7] [8] A second objection is that if a person encounters multiple people who disagree, and applies conciliationism serially, the procedure violates commutativity. The order that the person encounters the other people affects her resultant doxastic state.[9]

References

  1. Nathan Ballantyne. E.J. Coffman. Conciliationism and Uniqueness. Australasian Journal of Philosophy. 90. 4. 2012. 10.1080/00048402.2011.627926. 657–670. 7176580.
  2. David Christensen. Disagreement as Evidence: The Epistemology of Controversy. Philosophy Compass. Sep 2009. 4. 5. 756–767. 10.1111/j.1747-9991.2009.00237.x.
  3. David Christensen. Disagreement, question-begging, and epistemic self-criticism. Philosophers' Imprint. Mar 2011. 11. 6.
  4. Web site: Wang. Torrey. The Total Evidence View as a Case for Conciliationism. 22 August 2014. https://web.archive.org/web/20140826115632/http://www3.nd.edu/~twang6/papers/CaseforConciliationism.pdf. 26 August 2014. dead.
  5. Book: John Pittard. Michael Bergmann. Patrick Kain. Challenges to Moral and Religious Belief: Disagreement and Evolution. 2014. Oxford University Press. 978-0-19-966977-6. http://www.johnpittard.com/John_Pittard/Research_files/Pittard.%20Conciliationism%20and%20Religious%20Disagreement%20Pub%20length.pdf. Conciliationism and Religious Disagreement.
  6. Web site: Christensen's 'Disagreement as Evidence: the Epistemology of Controversy' – Part 4. Philosopher's Workshop. 22 August 2014. 9 Oct 2012. https://web.archive.org/web/20140826120712/http://philosophersworkshop.wordpress.com/2012/10/09/christensens-disagreement-as-evidence-the-epistemology-of-controversy-part-4/. 26 August 2014. dead.
  7. Shawn Graves. The Self-undermining Objection to the Epistemology of Disagreement. Faith and Philosophy. Jan 2013. 30. 1. 93–106. 10.5840/faithphil20133015. free.
  8. Web site: John Pittard. Resolute Conciliationism. 22 August 2014. Jun 2014.
  9. Gardiner. Georgi. 2014. The Commutativity of Evidence: A Problem for Conciliatory Views of Peer Disagreement. Episteme. en. 11. 1. 83–95. 10.1017/epi.2013.42. 145293979. 1742-3600.

This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Conciliationism".

Except where otherwise indicated, Everything.Explained.Today is © Copyright 2009-2024, A B Cryer, All Rights Reserved. Cookie policy.