Philosophical Renegades

In Jennifer Lackey & David Christensen (eds.), The Epistemology of Disagreement: New Essays. Oxford University Press. pp. 121-166 (2013)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
If you retain your belief upon learning that a large number and percentage of your recognized epistemic superiors disagree with you, then what happens to the epistemic status of your belief? I investigate that theoretical question as well has the applied case of philosophical disagreement—especially disagreement regarding purely philosophical error theories, theories that do not have much empirical support and that reject large swaths of our most commonsensical beliefs. I argue that even if all those error theories are false, either (a) the average philosopher’s true commonsensical beliefs are epistemically impoverished, or (b) a good portion of philosophy is bunk and philosophers should give up most of their error theories despite the fact that their supporting arguments are generally as good as or even better than other philosophical arguments.
Reprint years
2013
PhilPapers/Archive ID
FRAPSK
Revision history
Archival date: 2015-04-13
View upload history
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Disagreement.Matheson, Jonathan & Frances, Bryan

View all 6 citations / Add more citations

Added to PP index
2009-04-23

Total views
732 ( #4,165 of 46,392 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
150 ( #3,353 of 46,392 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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