Peer disagreement and total evidence
How should you respond to the disagreeing opinion of your peer? This question has been discussed under the name of ~peer disagreement problem~ in epistemology. In this thesis, I focus on this problem by assessing main views about it. In Chapter 1, I provide a paradigmatic peer disagreement case and explain some preliminary points for the later discussion. Then, I discuss the two major views on the peer disagreement problem, Total Evidence View and Equal Weight View. In Chapter 2, I explain and assess Thomas Kelly's Total Evidence View by distinguishing the two main claims of it, the requirement of Total Evidence View and the total evidence principle. I criticize Total Evidence View by showing that these two claims cannot hold at the same time by discussing several disagreement cases. In Chapter 3, Equal Weight View is discussed by examining arguments for it provided by Adam Elga and David Christensen. I explain and assess this view also by distinguishing the two main claims, the requirement of Equal Weight View and the independence principle. I criticize that the independence principle does not generally hold, based on Kelly's idea of the justified higher order belief with help from Jennifer Lackey's argument.
Kwon, H.
Peer disagreement and total evidence. How should you respond to the disagreeing opinion of your peer? This question has been discussed under the name of ~peer disagreement problem~ in epistemology. In this thesis, I focus on this problem by assessing main views about it. In Chapter 1, I provide a paradigmatic peer disagreement case and explain some preliminary points for the later discussion. Then, I discuss the two major views on the peer disagreement problem, Total Evidence View and Equal Weight View. In Chapter 2, I explain and assess Thomas Kelly's Total Evidence View by distinguishing the two main claims of it, the requirement of Total Evidence View and the total evidence principle. I criticize Total Evidence View by showing that these two claims cannot hold at the same time by discussing several disagreement cases. In Chapter 3, Equal Weight View is discussed by examining arguments for it provided by Adam Elga and David Christensen. I explain and assess this view also by distinguishing the two main claims, the requirement of Equal Weight View and the independence principle. I criticize that the independence principle does not generally hold, based on Kelly's idea of the justified higher order belief with help from Jennifer Lackey's argument.
peer disagreement total evidence respond disagree opinion peer question discuss name peer disagreement problem epistemology focus problem assess main view provide paradigmatic peer disagreement case explain preliminary point later discussion discuss two_major view peer disagreement problem total evidence view equal weight view explain assess thomas kelly total evidence view distinguish_two main_claim requirement total evidence view total evidence principle criticize total evidence view show claim hold time discuss_several disagreement case equal weight view discuss examine argument provide explain assess view also distinguish_two main_claim requirement equal weight view independence principle criticize independence principle generally_hold base kelly idea justify high order belief help argument