On Political Disagreement - NYTimes.com - 0 views
opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/...on-political-disagreement
disagreement politics epistemic closure philosophy
shared by Javier E on 05 Aug 12
- Cached
-
On most political matters, then, we have what philosophers call “epistemic peers” — people at least our equals in the intellectual qualities needed to made good judgments about a given matter — who disagree with us. What should we make of this fact?
-
freedom of thought does not imply correctness of thought: my political right to assert my views does not mean that I have good reasons for holding them.
-
when epistemic peers disagree with me, I have a good reason to question my views. Shouldn’t I see their disagreeing as another piece of evidence in the political debate, one that may tip the balance against the case I have for my position.
- ...1 more annotation...
-
the restaurant disagreement is highly localized. Our different results do not mean we disagree on other topics. Political disagreements, however, go wide and deep. If we disagree about health care, we likely also disagree on welfare, budget deficits and regulating business. And this range of disagreements may well be because of differences in fundamental values. Such thoroughgoing differences suggest that I should not see those on the other side as epistemic peers.