HFIA03732U Modul 4: The epistemology of disagreement

The aim of the course is to introduce to the epistemology of disagreement, while at the same time supporting participants writing process. We often disagree about the facts, and this raise important question about what the rational response is. Suppose that Anton and Bert disagree about the proposition that global climate change is a fact, say because Anton believes it while Bert rejects the truth of it. Suppose that Anton and Bert are epistemic peers with regard to this question, that is, individuals who with are equally competent and careful, and share all evidence and background assumptions. How should Anton and Bert react to the fact that they disagree with one another, knowing that they are peers? Should Anton become less confident in his view? Or should he remain steadfast, and perhaps reject his previous assumption that Bert is his peer in these matters?

In the first part of the course we will study the main contributions in the debate on peer disagreement. In the more advanced parts of the course we will move on to what one might call complex disagreements. Disagreements can have varying degrees of complexity where the simplest concern two epistemic peers with diverging beliefs about the truth of a single, factual proposition. However, more may (i) involve larger sets of propositions that are interrelated and basic in various ways, say because they involve fundamental assumptions about the nature of the world, proper sources of evidence, or sound epistemic principles, (ii) involve other items than mere doxastic attitudes to factual propositions, e.g., elements of faith or trust, or attitudes such as openness or tolerance, (iii) involve agents with the actual psychology of human beings, (iv) involve different numbers of agents.