Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Disagreement$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Richard Feldman and Ted A. Warfield

Print publication date: 2010

Print ISBN-13: 9780199226078

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: September 2010

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199226078.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (oxford.universitypressscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2022. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use.date: 25 January 2022

Persistent Disagreement

Persistent Disagreement

Chapter:
(p.53) 3 Persistent Disagreement
Source:
Disagreement
Author(s):

Catherine Z. Elgin

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199226078.003.0004

This chapter responds to arguments for the conclusion that participants in persistent peer disagreement ought to suspend judgment about the disputed proposition by noting that ‘ought implies can’ and that belief (and suspension of judgment) are typically not under the relevant kind of voluntary control. It is argued that issues about disagreement are better seen as being about acceptance rather than belief, and that continuing to accept propositions in the face of disagreement can have sufficient value to make it rational, and thus that peers can rationally accept conflicting propositions.

Keywords:   disagreement, belief, acceptance, rationality, ought implies can, voluntary control

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .