Rationalist Resistance to Disagreement-Motivated Religious Skepticism

2021 ◽  
pp. 180-216
Author(s):  
John Pittard
Keyword(s):  
Bayesian Framework ◽  
Equal Weight ◽  
Epistemic Peers

Many epistemologists argue that responses to disagreement should exhibit a certain kind of epistemic impartiality. “Strong conciliationists” claim that we ought to give equal weight to the views of those who, judged from a dispute-neutral perspective, appear to be our “epistemic peers” with respect to some disputed matter. Using a Bayesian framework, Chapter 8 considers whether there is a plausible epistemic impartiality principle that would require us to give up confident religious (or irreligious) belief in favor of religious skepticism. It is argued that the strong conciliationist’s epistemic impartiality is untenable, at least in contexts like the religious domain where the primary questions under dispute cannot be cleanly separated from questions about what qualifications are needed to reliably assess those primary questions. The chapter recommends instead a rationalist view on which rational insight can sustain justified confidence even when impartial grounds are lacking. It closes by defending the “religious acceptability” of this rationalist epistemology.

Unconfirmed peers and spinelessness

2015 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 425-444 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben Sherman
Keyword(s):  
Equal Weight ◽  
Equal Weight View ◽  
Epistemic Peer ◽  
Epistemic Peers

AbstractThe Equal Weight View holds that, when we discover we disagree with an epistemic peer, we should give our peer’s judgment as much weight as our own. But how should we respond when we cannot tell whether those who disagree with us are our epistemic peers? I argue for a position I will call the Earn-a-Spine View. According to this view, parties to a disagreement can remain confident, at least in some situations, by finding justifiable reasons to think their opponents are less credible than themselves, even if those reasons are justifiable only because they lack information about their opponents.

scholarly journals A Vindication of the Equal-Weight View

Episteme ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 324-335 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomas Bogardus
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Equal Weight ◽  
Peer Disagreement ◽  
Equal Weight View ◽  
Direct Acquaintance ◽  
Epistemic Peers

ABSTRACTSome philosophers believe that when epistemic peers disagree, each has an obligation to accord the other's assessment the same weight as her own. I first make the antecedent of this Equal-Weight View more precise, and then I motivate the View by describing cases in which it gives the intuitively correct verdict. Next I introduce some apparent counterexamples–cases of apparent peer disagreement in which, intuitively, one should not give equal weight to the other party's assessment. To defuse these apparent counterexamples, an advocate of the View might try to explain how they are not genuine cases of peer disagreement. I examine David Christensen's and Adam Elga's explanations and find them wanting. I then offer a novel explanation, which turns on a distinction between knowledge from reports and knowledge from direct acquaintance. Finally, I extend my explanation to provide a handy and satisfying response to the charge of self-defeat.

scholarly journals Consensual Decision-Making Among Epistemic Peers

Episteme ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 110-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephan Hartmann ◽  
Carlo Martini ◽  
Jan Sprenger
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Social Network ◽  
General Definition ◽  
Equal Weight ◽  
Wagner Model ◽  
Formal Tool ◽  
Epistemic Peers ◽  
Group Deliberation ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Impact

ABSTRACTThis 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.

Effects of compression during formation on the microstructure of composite hydroxylapatite/plaster implants for bone reconstruction

1988 ◽  
Vol 46 ◽  
pp. 750-751
Author(s):  
J. Hanker ◽  
K. Cowden ◽  
R. Noecker ◽  
P. Yates ◽  
N. Georgiade ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cosmetic Surgery ◽  
Glass Plate ◽  
Surgical Reconstruction ◽  
Equal Weight ◽  
Sintered Ceramic ◽  
Setting Times ◽  
Excess Water ◽  
Mixture Prior ◽  
Mechanical Strengths ◽  
Calcium Sulfate Hemihydrate

Composites of plaster of Paris (PP) and hydroxylapatite (HA) particles are being applied for the surgical reconstruction of craniofacial bone defects and for cosmetic surgery. Two types of HA particles are being employed, the dense sintered ceramic (DHA) and the porous, coralline hydroxylapatite (PHA) particles. Excess water is expressed out of the moistened HA/PP mixture prior to implantation and setting by pressing it in a non-tapered syringe against a glass plate. This results in implants with faster setting times and greater mechanical strengths. It was therefore of interest to compare samples of the compressed versus noncompressed mixtures to see whether or not any changes in their microstructure after setting could be related to these different properties.USG Medical Grade Calcium Sulfate Hemihydrate (which has the lowest mortar consistency of any known plaster) was mixed with an equal weight of Interpore 200 particles (a commercial form of PHA). After moistening with a minimum amount of water, disc-shaped noncompressed samples were made by filling small holes (0.339 in. diameter x 0.053 in. deep) in polypropylene molds with a microspatula.

Modeling Interstation Travel Speed of Hybrid Bus Rapid Transit within A Bayesian Framework

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ji-hua Hu ◽  
Jia-xian Liang
Keyword(s):  
Road Traffic ◽  
Travel Speed ◽  
Bayesian Framework ◽  
Bus Rapid Transit ◽  
Rapid Transit ◽  
Important Indicator ◽  
Main Road ◽  
Traffic Lights ◽  
Speed Distribution ◽  
Hybrid Bus

Interstation travel speed is an important indicator of the running state of hybrid Bus Rapid Transit and passenger experience. Due to the influence of road traffic, traffic lights and other factors, the interstation travel speeds are often some kind of multi-peak and it is difficult to use a single distribution to model them. In this paper, a Gaussian mixture model charactizing the interstation travel speed of hybrid BRT under a Bayesian framework is established. The parameters of the model are inferred using the Reversible-Jump Markov Chain Monte Carlo approach (RJMCMC), including the number of model components and the weight, mean and variance of each component. Then the model is applied to Guangzhou BRT, a kind of hybrid BRT. From the results, it can be observed that the model can very effectively describe the heterogeneous speed data among different inter-stations, and provide richer information usually not available from the traditional models, and the model also produces an excellent fit to each multimodal speed distribution curve of the inter-stations. The causes of different speed distribution can be identified through investigating the Internet map of GBRT, they are big road traffic and long traffic lights respectively, which always contribute to a main road crossing. So, the BRT lane should be elevated through the main road to decrease the complexity of the running state.

Two Arguments from Disagreement

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Stoljar
Keyword(s):  
Van Inwagen ◽  
David Chalmers ◽  
Peter Van Inwagen ◽  
Epistemic Peers ◽  
Suspension Of Judgement

This chapter criticizes two disagreement arguments for pessimism. The first, due to David Chalmers, asserts on empirical grounds that there is no large collective convergence to, or agreement on, the truth on the big questions of philosophy. The second, inspired by Peter van Inwagen, asserts that disagreement in philosophy is of a certain special epistemological kind, viz., it rationally requires suspension of judgement, at least in many cases; hence progress is impossible. The existence of ‘epistemic peers’ as a condition of suspension of judgement is discussed. It is suggested that neither argument is persuasive. The chapter ends by asking whether any argument from disagreement may succeed.

CHASSIS DESIGN & PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOR THE EUROPEAN EXOMARS ROVER

2005 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 507-517
Author(s):  
Alex Ellery ◽  
Lutz Richter ◽  
Reinhold Bertrand
Keyword(s):  
Performance Analysis ◽  
Weight Distribution ◽  
High Performance ◽  
High Mobility ◽  
Scientific Instrument ◽  
Equal Weight ◽  
Scientific Instruments ◽  
Design Issues ◽  
Martian Surface ◽  
Considerable Size

The European Space Agency’s (ESA) ExoMars rover has recently been subject to a Phase A study led by EADS Astrium, UK. This rover mission represents a highly ambitious venture in that the rover is of considerable size ~200+kg with high mobility carrying a highly complex scientific instrument suite (Pasteur) of up to 40 kg in mass devoted to exobiological investigation of the Martian surface and sub-surface. The chassis design has been a particular challenge given the inhospitable terrain on Mars and the need to traverse such terrain robustly in order to deliver the scientific instruments to science targets of exobiological interest, We present some of the results and design issues encountered during the Phase A study related to the chassis. In particular, we have focussed on the overall tractive performance of a number of candidate chassis designs and selected the RCL (Science & Technology Rover Company Ltd in Russian) concept C design as the baseline option in terms of high performance with minimal mechanical complexity overhead. This design is a six-wheeled double-rocker bogie design to provide springless suspension and maintain approximately equal weight distribution across each wheel.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document