Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
---|---|---|---|---|
1160591 | Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A | 2010 | 10 Pages |
Abstract
It has been claimed that epistemic peers, upon discovering that they disagree on some issue, should give up their opposing views and ‘split the difference’. The present paper challenges this claim by showing, with the help of computer simulations, that what the rational response to the discovery of peer disagreement is—whether it is sticking to one’s belief or splitting the difference—depends on factors that are contingent and highly context-sensitive.
Related Topics
Social Sciences and Humanities
Arts and Humanities
History
Authors
Igor Douven,