What are the meta problems of peer disagreement in philosophy and religion?
Best insight from top research papers
The meta problems of peer disagreement in philosophy and religion encompass various challenges. In philosophy, the debate revolves around whether known disagreement among epistemic peers undermines rationality, with differing responses proposed by scholars like Lackey, Christensen, and Olsson . Additionally, the uniform response to peer disagreement across different domains is questioned, suggesting that different areas may require distinct approaches . In religious contexts, believers often justify their beliefs by claiming different evidence or experiences, leading to asymmetries in religious disagreements . Philosophers' reactions to religious disagreements vary based on personal beliefs, training, and changes in religious outlook, influencing their assessments of peer disagreement about religion . These complexities highlight the nuanced nature of peer disagreement in both philosophy and religion.
Answers from top 5 papers
More filters
| Papers (5) | Insight |
|---|---|
| Meta problems of peer disagreement in philosophy and religion include the impact of personal beliefs, philosophical training, and differing views on the nature of religious beliefs among academic philosophers. | |
| Meta problems of peer disagreement in philosophy involve rational reactions to conflicting beliefs. Lackey challenges conciliation, while Christensen defends it but faces issues with defining peers based on justified beliefs. | |
9 Citations | Not addressed in the paper. |
| Not addressed in the paper. | |
2 Citations | Private religious experiences can create an evidential asymmetry in religious disagreements, pressuring skeptics to reconsider their stance when faced with believers' reported experiences. |
Related Questions
What are philosophical discussions regarding AI?4 answersPhilosophical discussions regarding artificial intelligence (AI) span a wide range of topics, reflecting the complexity and rapid development of the field. One primary area of debate is the potential and limitations of AI, with some viewing it as a tool to significantly improve productivity and human lives, while others express concerns about its disruptive impact and the fear it instills in humanity. The historical and philosophical evolution of AI, including the shift from symbolism to connectionism, highlights the ongoing quest to understand and implement intelligence, raising questions about the fundamental differences between biological and artificial intelligence.
The concept of consciousness is another critical philosophical issue, where AI's lack of consciousness and moral virtues, as compared to humans, is seen as a significant distinction that necessitates human intervention in AI's application. The philosophy of AI encompasses various theories and experiments, including the exploration of machine consciousness and the ethical frameworks surrounding advanced AI development. The distinction between "weak" and "strong" AI brings forth debates on the overestimation of AI's capabilities, challenging the notion that computers can fully replicate human cognitive states and moral judgments.
Philosophical inquiries into AI also delve into the essence of intelligence, language processing, and the inner workings of AI systems, examining the philosophical underpinnings of both strong and weak AI versions. The revision of AI's initial goals and the acknowledgment of human cognitive peculiarities and limitations further enrich these discussions. Philosophers are increasingly analyzing AI's capabilities and potential dangers, reflecting on the evolution of artificially created mechanisms and their implications.
Concerns about superintelligent AI and related philosophical issues are prevalent within the AI community, indicating a broader contemplation of AI's future trajectory and its ethical implications. Finally, the role of AI in scientific revolutions and its impact on individual and collective consciousness underscores the transformative potential of AI, prompting a reevaluation of scientific methodologies and societal norms. These philosophical discussions are crucial for navigating the challenges and opportunities presented by AI, ensuring its development aligns with ethical and humanistic principles.
What are problems with philosophical discussions regarding AI?4 answersPhilosophical discussions regarding Artificial Intelligence (AI) encounter several significant problems that challenge the development and understanding of AI ethics and consciousness. One of the primary issues is the disagreement on the nature and resolution of the Frame Problem, which highlights the difficulty in enabling AI to perform commonsense reasoning and understand relevance in various contexts. This problem underscores a broader issue of holism and relevance that has persisted since the early days of AI research. Additionally, the philosophical debate often gets entangled in autotelic distinctions and thought experiments that, while intellectually stimulating, do not necessarily advance the practical development of ethical AI systems. These discussions can end in what has been described as an "epistemological fiasco," offering little in terms of actionable insights for AI development.
Moreover, the philosophical inquiry into AI is hampered by a lack of consensus on foundational issues, such as whether AI can exhibit consciousness or possess ethical autonomy. The Cartesian perspective, for instance, argues against the computational view of the mind, emphasizing the non-mechanical nature of cognitive processes and consciousness, which AI, as it stands, cannot replicate. This perspective raises doubts about AI's ability to achieve genuine understanding or ethical reasoning.
The philosophical underpinnings of AI also face criticism for being overly technical and lacking in deep philosophical thinking, which is necessary for addressing the ethical and cognitive claims made about AI. Furthermore, the ethical implications of AI and the challenges of applying ethical and legal standards to AI systems reveal a gap in the theoretical framework needed to guide AI development and regulation. This gap points to the strategic challenge of balancing foundational philosophical issues with the pragmatic needs of AI governance.
In summary, philosophical discussions on AI grapple with the complexity of defining and solving the Frame Problem, the practical relevance of philosophical debates, the challenge of consensus on consciousness and ethical autonomy, and the need for a robust theoretical framework to guide AI's ethical and legal regulation.
How have philosophers and theologians attempted to resolve or mitigate the issues raised by the Euthyphro Dilemma?5 answersPhilosophers and theologians have approached the Euthyphro Dilemma in various ways. Some, like Alston, propose the concept of supererogation to explain God's moral goodness despite being above moral obligations. Others, such as Koons, argue that God's nature should be constrained by an external standard of goodness to make His moral goodness intelligible, challenging the divine command theory. Page suggests a response based on the metaphysics of dispositions and natural law theory, drawing parallels between God's creation of laws of nature and goods to address the dilemma. Zangwill defends the view that morality depends on God by proposing that God's reasons for moral-natural dependencies may have non-moral content, supporting a slightly restricted divine command theory.
Issue about peer pressure in word issue5 answersPeer pressure is a prevalent issue in various contexts. In the field of phonology, Bybee proposes that high-frequency words can influence the pronunciation and regularization of low-frequency words. In the business world, peer pressure can affect consumer behavior, with individuals more likely to buy products that their peers buy. In the realm of sexual behavior, young people use the discourses of "peer pressure to have sex" and "peer normalization of sex" to explain and justify their sexual activity. Additionally, peer pressure can have positive effects in work teams, as peer monitoring and sanctioning can increase cooperation and discourage non-cooperative behavior. These examples highlight the influence of peer pressure in various domains and the need to understand its impact on individuals and groups.
What are the philosophical implications of the debate between science and religion?5 answersThe philosophical implications of the debate between science and religion are complex and contextual in nature. The interactions between theology and science raise questions about the use and meaning of language, issues of realism and anti-realism, and differing epistemologies. The question of legitimate influence between science and theology, as well as the presence of naturalism in natural science, are central issues in this debate. Additionally, the debate has a political dimension, shaped by historical contexts and conflicts over power and authority. Philosophy plays a role in facilitating dialogue between religion and science, transcending certitude and relativity, and providing a universal perspective. The differing epistemologies of religious fundamentalists and scientists contribute to the ongoing inability to resolve the differences between science and religion.
How does the philosophy of technology engage with religion?5 answersThe philosophy of technology engages with religion by exploring the relationship between the two domains. It recognizes that religion and technology are not inherently opposed, but rather share common elements and concerns. The philosopher Derrida argues that religion and technology are interconnected, with religion utilizing technology even as it rejects it. Other scholars, such as Florensky and Dessauer, view technology as a means to achieve harmony and formation, respectively, within the context of religious culture. Additionally, the philosophy of religion can uncover underlying assumptions about technology and provide insights into its justifications, similar to arguments for the existence of God. Furthermore, there is a need for a religious discourse in the philosophy of technology to address the ultimate concerns that drive technological action. Ultimately, religious deliberation on technology should consider a tradition's historical engagement with technology to better navigate the challenges posed by new technologies.