What Optimistic Responses to Deep Disagreement get Right (and Wrong)
Main Article Content
Keywords
Deep Disagreement, Skepticism, Problem of the Criterion, argumentation
Abstract
In this paper, I argue for three theses. First, that the problem of Deep Disagreement is usefully understood as an instance of the skeptical Problem of the Criterion. Second, there are structural similarities between proposed optimistic answers to deep disagreement and the problem of the criterion. Third, in light of these similarities, there are both good and bad consequences for proposed solutions to the problem of deep disagreement.
Downloads
References
Aikin, S. (2018b). Dialecticality and Deep Disagreement. Symposion, 5(2), 173-179. https://bit.ly/2xI4oOX
Aikin, S. (2019). Deep Disagreement, the Dark Enlightenment, and the Rhetoric of the Red Pill. The Journal of Applied Philosophy, 36(3), 420-435. https://doi.org/10.1111/japp.12331
Amico, R. (1993). The Problem of the Criterion. Rowman & Littlefield.
Chisholm, R. (1973). The Problem of the Criterion. Marquette University Press.
Cling, A. (2014). The Epistemic Regress Problem, The Problem of the Criterion, and the Value of Reasons. Metaphilosophy, 45(2), 161-171. https://doi.org/10.1111/meta.12073
Davson-Galle, P. (1992). Arguing, Arguments, and Deep Disagreements. Informal Logic, 14(2/3), 147-156. https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v14i2.2537
Duran, C. (2016). Levels of Depth in Deep Disagreement. OSSA Conference Archive, 109, 1-8. https://bit.ly/2XNNc5x
Fogelin, R. (1985). The Logic of Deep Disagreements. Informal Logic, 7(1), 3-11. https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v7i1.2696
Godden, D. M., & Brenner, W. H. (2010). Wittgenstein and the Logic of Deep Disagreement. Universidad Diego Portales, Centro de Estudios de la Argumentación y el Razonamiento.
Lugg, A. (1986). Deep Disagreement and Informal Logic: No Cause for Alarm. Informal Logic, 8(1), 47-51. https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v8i1.2680
Memedi, V. (2007). Resolving Deep Disagreement. OSSA Conference Archive, 108, 1-10. https://bit.ly/2VTSo5l
Sextus Empiricus (1990). Outlines of Pyrrhonism (R. G. Bury, Trad.). Prometheus Books.
Wang, C. (2018). Beyond Argument: A Hegelian Approach to Deep Disagreement. Symposion, 5(2), 181-195. https://bit.ly/2zdVCc6
Article Sidebar
Article Details
Scott F. Aikin, Vanderbilt University
Assistant Professor of Philosophy and Director of Undergraduate Studies at Vanderbilt University, USA
Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
-
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Avisos:
- No tiene que cumplir con la licencia para elementos del material de dominio público o cuando su uso esté permitido por una excepción o limitación aplicable .
- No se dan garantías. Es posible que la licencia no le otorgue todos los permisos necesarios para el uso previsto. Por ejemplo, otros derechos como la publicidad, la privacidad o los derechos morales pueden limitar la forma en que utiliza el material.
