Consensual Decision-Making Among Epistemic Peers

Episteme 6 (2):110-129 (2009)
  Copy   BIBTEX


This paper focuses on the question of how to resolve disagreement and uses the Lehrer-Wagner model as a formal tool for investigating consensual decision-making. The main result consists in a general definition of when agents treat each other as epistemic peers (Kelly 2005; Elga 2007), and a theorem vindicating the “equal weight view” to resolve disagreement among epistemic peers. We apply our findings to an analysis of the impact of social network structures on group deliberation processes, and we demonstrate their stability with the help of numerical simulations.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 94,749

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

Questionable Peers and Spinelessness.Sherman Benjamin - 2015 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 45 (4):425-444.
Unconfirmed peers and spinelessness.Ben Sherman - 2015 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 45 (4):425-444.
Reasonable Disagreement and Rational Group Inquiry.Marc Moffett - 2007 - Episteme: A Journal of Social Epistemology 4 (3):352-367.
Disagreement, equal weight and commutativity.Alastair Wilson - 2010 - Philosophical Studies 149 (3):321 - 326.
Intra-Group Disagreement and Conciliationism.Nathan Sheff - 2020 - In Fernando Broncano-Berrocal & Adam Carter (eds.), The Epistemology of Group Disagreement. Routledge. pp. 90-102.


Added to PP

200 (#104,312)

6 months
51 (#101,666)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Jan Sprenger
University of Turin
Carlo Martini
University Vita-Salute San Raffaele
Stephan Hartmann
Ludwig Maximilians Universität, München

References found in this work

Epistemology of disagreement: The good news.David Christensen - 2007 - Philosophical Review 116 (2):187-217.
Reflection and disagreement.Adam Elga - 2007 - Noûs 41 (3):478–502.
Peer disagreement and higher order evidence.Thomas Kelly - 2011 - In Alvin I. Goldman & Dennis Whitcomb (eds.), Social Epistemology: Essential Readings. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 183--217.
The epistemic significance of disagreement.Thomas Kelly - 2018 - In Jeremy Fantl, Matthew McGrath & Ernest Sosa (eds.), Contemporary epistemology: an anthology. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. pp. 167-196.

View all 19 references / Add more references