Deep Disagreement (Part 1): Theories of Deep Disagreement

Philosophy Compass 17 (12):e12886 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX


Some disagreements concern our most fundamental beliefs, principles, values, or worldviews, such as those about the existence of God, society and politics, or the trustworthiness of science. These are ‘deep disagreements’. But what exactly are deep disagreements? This paper critically overviews theories of deep disagreement. It does three things. First, it explains the differences between deep and other kinds of disagreement, including peer, persistent, and widespread disagreement. Second, it critically overviews two mainstream theories of deep disagreement, the Wittgensteinian account and the Fundamental Epistemic Principle account, before introducing a Hybrid account. Finally, it explores the notion that deep disagreements can be deeper than others.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,069

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

What is Deep Disagreement?Chris Ranalli - 2018 - Topoi 40 (5):983-998.
Deep disagreement and hinge epistemology.Chris Ranalli - 2020 - Synthese 197 (11):4975-5007.
Understanding Deep Disagreement.Duncan Pritchard - 2023 - International Journal of Philosophical Studies 31 (3):301-317.
The fundamental model of deep disagreements.Victoria Lavorerio - 2021 - Metaphilosophy 52 (3-4):416-431.
Deep conflicts and deep disagreements.Manuel Almagro - 2024 - Theoria: Revista de Teoría, Historia y Fundamentos de la Ciencia 39 (1):23-42.


Added to PP

75 (#226,132)

6 months
28 (#111,985)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Christopher Ranalli
VU University Amsterdam
Thirza Lagewaard
Vrije University

Citations of this work

Disagreement.Jonathan Matheson & Bryan Frances - 2018 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Modeling Deep Disagreement in Default Logic.Frederik J. Andersen - 2024 - Australasian Journal of Logic 21 (2):47-63.

View all 9 citations / Add more citations