Location

University of Windsor

Document Type

Restricted Access

Keywords

epistemology of disagreement, pragmatism, social epistemology

Start Date

18-5-2011 9:00 AM

End Date

21-5-2011 5:00 PM

Abstract

In this paper, I take up the conciliatory-steadfast debate occurring within social epistemology in regards to the phenomenon of peer disagreement. I will argue, because the conciliatory perspective al-lows us to understand argumentation pragmatically—as a method of problem-solving within a community rather than as a method for obtaining the truth—that in most cases, we should not simply agree to disagree.

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Share

COinS
 
May 18th, 9:00 AM May 21st, 5:00 PM

Should we agree to disagree? Pragmatism and peer disagreement

University of Windsor

In this paper, I take up the conciliatory-steadfast debate occurring within social epistemology in regards to the phenomenon of peer disagreement. I will argue, because the conciliatory perspective al-lows us to understand argumentation pragmatically—as a method of problem-solving within a community rather than as a method for obtaining the truth—that in most cases, we should not simply agree to disagree.