David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Politics, Philosophy and Economics 11 (1):26-44 (2012)
It is widely believed that bringing parties with differing opinions together to discuss their differences will help both in securing consensus and also in ensuring that this consensus closely approximates the truth. This paper investigates this presumption using two mathematical and computer simulation models. Ultimately, these models show that increased contact can be useful in securing both consensus and truth, but it is not always beneficial in this way. This suggests one should not, without qualification, support policies which increase interpersonal contact if one seeks to improve the epistemic performance of groups
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Kevin J. S. Zollman (2013). Network Epistemology: Communication in Epistemic Communities. Philosophy Compass 8 (1):15-27.
Gerhard Schurz (2012). Meta-Induction in Epistemic Networks and the Social Spread of Knowledge. Episteme 9 (2):151-170.
Aron Vallinder & Erik J. Olsson (2013). Do Computer Simulations Support the Argument From Disagreement? Synthese 190 (8):1437-1454.
Similar books and articles
Boaz Miller (2013). When is Consensus Knowledge Based? Distinguishing Shared Knowledge From Mere Agreement. Synthese 190 (7):1293-1316.
Aviezer Tucker (2003). The Epistemic Significance of Consensus. Inquiry 46 (4):501 – 521.
Miriam Solomon (2001). Consensus in Science. The Proceedings of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy 2001:193-204.
Jonathan D. Moreno (1988). Ethics by Committee: The Moral Authority of Consensus. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 13 (4):411-432.
Paul Seabright (1988). Objectivity, Disagreement, and Projectibility. Inquiry 31 (1):25 – 51.
Dan Lyons (1976). Action, Excellence, and Achievement. Inquiry 19 (1-4):277 – 297.
Bruce Jennings (1991). Possibilities of Consensus: Toward Democratic Moral Discourse. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 16 (4):447-463.
Kyung-Man Kim (1996). Hierarchy of Scientific Consensus and the Flow of Dissensus Over Time. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 26 (1):3-25.
Carlo Martini, Jan Sprenger & Mark Colyvan (2013). Resolving Disagreement Through Mutual Respect. Erkenntnis 78 (4):881-898.
Steve Fuller (1986). The Elusiveness of Consensus in Science. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1986:106-119.
Boaz Miller (2016). Scientific Consensus and Expert Testimony in Courts: Lessons From the Bendectin Litigation. Foundations of Science 21 (1):15-33.
Johan E. Gustafsson & Martin Peterson (2012). A Computer Simulation of the Argument From Disagreement. Synthese 184 (3):387–405.
Jeffrey A. Barrett (1996). Oracles, Aesthetics, and Bayesian Consensus. Philosophy of Science 63 (3):280.
Jonathan D. Moreno (1995). Deciding Together: Bioethics and Moral Consensus. Oxford University Press.
Added to index2011-10-19
Total downloads10 ( #324,603 of 1,793,092 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #463,661 of 1,793,092 )
How can I increase my downloads?