Slide 1
An equally informed reasoner can challenge our confidence
Peer disagreement concerns disagreement with someone apparently comparable in relevant information and reasoning ability.
It raises questions about confidence in our own conclusion.
More to Read
Imagine two careful readers calculating the same shared bill and obtaining different totals. Their mismatch is evidence about possible error, even before either identifies the mistaken step. The case need not involve hostility.
Slide 2
Being a peer depends on this particular question
Peerhood is relative to a particular question. General intelligence or status does not establish equal access to the relevant evidence.
More to Read
One reader may have seen a discount the other missed. Discovering that difference changes the disagreement from a symmetric case into one involving unequal information. Establishing the setup matters before applying a general rule.
Slide 3
Conciliatory views treat disagreement as reason to lower confidence
Conciliatory approaches hold that recognizing a peer’s disagreement often gives a reason to reduce confidence. The disagreement itself becomes evidence to consider.
More to Read
Lowering confidence need not mean splitting every numerical answer down the middle. If the two bill totals are wrong, their average may also be wrong. Recalculation can be more appropriate than compromise.
Slide 4
Steadfast views allow some conclusions to be retained
Some philosophers allow a person to retain a conclusion despite peer disagreement.
They differ about how evidence about the question itself and trust in one’s own judgment should count.
More to Read
The debate asks whether a person's original reasons can outweigh the new disagreement evidence without simply favouring their own judgment because it is theirs. That challenge makes the issue more than a choice of temperament.
Slide 5
Tracing the difference can reveal more than instant compromise
A useful response examines evidence, assumptions and reasoning steps. Respectful disagreement can uncover a difference that an immediate compromise would hide.
More to Read
In the bill example, one calculation may include a service charge twice. Once the error is located, there is no need to preserve equal confidence in both totals merely to treat the readers respectfully.
Sources
- Disagreement
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy