Disagreement, Relativism and Doxastic Revision

Erkenntnis 79 (S1):1-18 (2014)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
I investigate the implication of the truth-relativist’s alleged ‘ faultless disagreements’ for issues in the epistemology of disagreement. A conclusion I draw is that the type of disagreement the truth-relativist claims to preserve fails in principle to be epistemically significant in the way we should expect disagreements to be in social-epistemic practice. In particular, the fact of faultless disagreement fails to ever play the epistemically significant role of making doxastic revision rationally required for either party in a disagreement. That the truth-relativists’ disagreements over centred content fail to play this epistemically significant role that disagreements characteristically play in social epistemology should leave us sceptical that disagreement is what the truth-relativist has actually preserved
Reprint years
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
Archival date: 2012-11-10
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Relativism and Monadic Truth.Cappelen, Herman & Hawthorne, John
Relativism and Monadic Truth.Cappelen, Herman & Hawthorne, John

View all 40 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Moral Steadfastness and Meta-Ethics.Fritz, James & McPherson, Tristram

Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
802 ( #4,159 of 50,193 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
51 ( #11,419 of 50,193 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.