Peer disagreement under multiple epistemic systems

Synthese 190 (13):2547-2556 (2013)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
In a situation of peer disagreement, peers are usually assumed to share the same evidence. However they might not share the same evidence for the epistemic system used to process the evidence. This synchronic complication of the peer disagreement debate suggested by Goldman (In Feldman R, Warfield T (eds) (2010) Disagreement. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 187–215) is elaborated diachronically by use of a simulation. The Hegselmann–Krause model is extended to multiple epistemic systems and used to investigate the role of consensus and difference splitting in peer disagreement. I find that the very possibility of multiple epistemic systems downgrades the epistemic value of consensus and makes difference splitting a suboptimal strategy
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
First archival date: 2014-01-16
Latest version: 1 (2014-01-16)
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
A System of Logic.Mill, John Stuart

View all 6 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
306 ( #13,636 of 47,316 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
78 ( #8,417 of 47,316 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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