Epistemic Abstainers, Epistemic Martyrs, and Epistemic Converts

Logos and Episteme 1 (2):211-219 (2010)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

An intuitive view regarding the epistemic significance of disagreement says that when epistemic peers disagree, they should suspend judgment. This abstemious view seems to embody a kind of detachment appropriate for rational beings; moreover, it seems to promote a kind of conciliatory inclination that makes for irenic and cooperative further discussion. Like many strategies for cooperation, however, the abstemious view creates opportunities for free-riding. In this essay, the authors argue that the believer who suspends judgment in the face of peer disagreement is vulnerable to a kind of manipulation on the part of more tenacious peers. The result is that the abstemious view can have the effect of encouraging dogmatism.

Author Profiles

Robert B. Talisse
Vanderbilt University
Scott Aikin
Vanderbilt University
Jonathan A. Neufeld
College of Charleston

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-07-03

Downloads
528 (#29,893)

6 months
81 (#50,383)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?