Who is an epistemic peer?

Logos and Episteme 2 (4):507-514 (2011)
Abstract
Contemporary epistemology of peer disagreement has largely focused on our immediate normative response to prima facie instances of disagreement. Whereas some philosophers demand that we should withhold judgment (or moderate our credences) in such cases, others argue that, unless new evidence becomes available, disagreement at best gives us reason to demote our interlocutor from his peer status. But what makes someone an epistemic peer in the first place? This question has not received the attention it deserves. I begin by surveying different notions of ‘epistemic peer’ that have been peddled in the contemporary literature, arguing that they tend to build normative assumptions about the correct response to disagreement into the notion of peerhood. Instead, I argue, epistemic peerhood needs to be taken seriously in its own right. Importantly, for epistemic agents to count as peers, they should exhibit a comparable degree of reflective awareness of the character and limitations of their own knowledge.
Keywords epistemic peers  peerhood  disagreement  ignorance
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s) 2069-0533
DOI 10.5840/logos-episteme2011242
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
Edit this record
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Mark as duplicate
Request removal from index
Revision history
Download options
Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 30,122
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
The Epistemic Dimension of Reasonableness.Federica Liveriero - 2015 - Philosophy and Social Criticism 41 (6):517-535.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Distant Peers.Mark Vorobej - 2011 - Metaphilosophy 42 (5):708-722.
Discovering Disagreeing Epistemic Peers and Superiors.Bryan Frances - 2012 - International Journal of Philosophical Studies 20 (1):1 - 21.
What Should We Do When We Disagree?Jennifer Lackey - 2008 - In Tamar Szabó Gendler & John Hawthorne (eds.), Oxford Studies in Epistemology. Oxford University Press. pp. 274-93.
Why Only Externalists Can Be Steadfast.Jeroen de Ridder - 2014 - Erkenntnis 79 (S1):185-199.
Possible Disagreements and Defeat.Brandon Carey - 2011 - Philosophical Studies 155 (3):371-381.
Reflection and Disagreement.Adam Elga - 2007 - Noûs 41 (3):478–502.
Moral Intuitions, Reliability and Disagreement.David Killoren - 2010 - Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 4 (1):1-35.
Added to PP index
2012-01-09

Total downloads
241 ( #15,429 of 2,191,314 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
16 ( #11,123 of 2,191,314 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads
My notes
Sign in to use this feature