Banca de DEFESA: JULIOMAR MARQUES SILVA
Uma banca de DEFESA de DOUTORADO foi cadastrada pelo programa.STUDENT : JULIOMAR MARQUES SILVA
DATE: 08/12/2021
TIME: 09:00
LOCAL: Ambiente virtual
TITLE:
THE PROBLEM OF RATIONAL DISAGREEMENT AMONG PEERS: A DEFENSE OF THE CONCILIATORY ATTITUDE OF HUMBLE INTELLECTUAL
KEY WORDS:
Disagreement. Epistemic Peers. Intellectual Humility.
PAGES: 154
BIG AREA: Ciências Humanas
AREA: Filosofia
SUBÁREA: Epistemologia
SUMMARY:
This thesis inquires about the problem of rational disagreement between epistemic peers. Recently, there is much discussion in epistemology on what would be our epistemic duty in peer disagreements. In others words, the philosophy wants to know what is the rule, the norm, or the rational attitude we should follow in contexts of disagreement. About this question, many pieces of literature arose and several theoretical positions consolidate as an alternative to this problem. For many authors, called conciliationists, disagreement works as a kind of epistemic defeater, for this reason, both parts should re-evaluate their own belief and give equal weight to the opposite belief. Other authors, however, defend a kind of non-conciliationism, for this perspective, we can be steadfast and we can ignore the opponent, the disagreement does not defeat the previous justification we have for the belief. Besides these extreme positions, lately are appearing in the debate many intermediate positions. Furthermore, many problems and objections are directed to each part involved in this debate. The first three chapters of the thesis bring a general discussion on this debate, in these chapters I discuss the main positions – their arguments and their problems. In the fourth and last chapter, I defend a personal position, this one says that in face of a peer disagreement we should have a conciliationist attitude of intellectual humility. This intellectual attitude is conciliationist because understanding that a disagreement with an epistemic peer can affect our own belief, then we should revise our own justification and consider the opposite belief. It is intellectually humble because makes us to recognize our own intellectual limitations. Different from others conciliationist positions, this attitude of humility is not exactly a universal principle, it is more precisely a kind of disposition or intellectual posture. Thus, the conciliationist attitude of intellectual humility in face of peer disagreement could deal better with some objections that affect traditional conciliationism.
Keywords: Disagreement. Epistemic Peers. Intellectual Humility.
BANKING MEMBERS:
Presidente - 1082451 - WALDOMIRO JOSE DA SILVA FILHO
Interno - 809.725.355-00 - FELIPE ROCHA LIMA SANTOS - UFBA
Interno - 1418569 - GIOVANNI ROLLA
Externo à Instituição - PLINIO JUNQUEIRA SMITH - UNIFESP
Externo à Instituição - DANILO MARCONDES DE SOUZA FILHO - PUC - RJ
Externo à Instituição - TIEGUE VIEIRA RODRIGUES - UFSM
Externa à Instituição - GUADALUPE REINOSO