When is consensus knowledge based? Distinguishing shared knowledge from mere agreement

Synthese 190 (7):1293-1316 (2013)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Scientific consensus is widely deferred to in public debates as a social indicator of the existence of knowledge. However, it is far from clear that such deference to consensus is always justified. The existence of agreement in a community of researchers is a contingent fact, and researchers may reach a consensus for all kinds of reasons, such as fighting a common foe or sharing a common bias. Scientific consensus, by itself, does not necessarily indicate the existence of shared knowledge among the members of the consensus community. I address the question of under what conditions it is likely that a consensus is in fact knowledge based. I argue that a consensus is likely to be knowledge based when knowledge is the best explanation of the consensus, and I identify three conditions—social calibration, apparent consilience of evidence, and social diversity, for knowledge being the best explanation of a consensus
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
Archival date: 2012-10-06
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Epistemic Luck.Pritchard, Duncan
Models as Mediators: Perspectives on Natural and Social Science.Morgan, Mary S. & Morrison, Margaret (eds.)

View all 62 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Understanding and Trusting Science.Slater, Matthew H.; Huxster, Joanna K. & E. Bresticker, Julia
Market Epistemology.Thicke, Michael

View all 16 citations / Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
2,949 ( #348 of 40,775 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
982 ( #211 of 40,775 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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