Incommensurability and Wide-Ranging Arguments for Steadfastness in Religious Disagreements: Increasingly Popular, But Eventually Complacent.
Choo and Pittard recently have presented new attractive incommensurability arguments for remaining steadfast in religious beliefs even when disagreeing with sophisticated disputants. This article responds to the latest iteration of this genre in the work of Choo, and does double duty evaluating more...
| Publicado en: | Topoi: An International Review of Philosophy Vol. 40; no. 5; pp. 1149 - 1160 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Springer Nature
Nov2021
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=153318101&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 153318101 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 01677411 NM2 jtl: Topoi: An International Review of Philosophy issn: 01677411 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Nov2021 vid: 40 iid: 5 pid: 237 pub: Springer Nature artinfo: ui: 153318101 10.1007/s11245-019-09658-1 ppf: 1149 ppct: 11 formats: fmt: @attributes: type: P size: 618KB tig: atl: Incommensurability and Wide-Ranging Arguments for Steadfastness in Religious Disagreements: Increasingly Popular, But Eventually Complacent. aug: au: Kraft, James affil: Huston Tillotson University, 900 Chicon, 78702, Austin, TX, USA su: Perseverance (Ethics) Argument Virtues sug: subj: Perseverance (Ethics) Argument Virtues keyword: Disagreement Epistemology Epistemology of disagreement Epistemology of religious disagreement Incommensurability Religious disagreement Widespread disagreement ab: Choo and Pittard recently have presented new attractive incommensurability arguments for remaining steadfast in religious beliefs even when disagreeing with sophisticated disputants. This article responds to the latest iteration of this genre in the work of Choo, and does double duty evaluating more generally the merits of this genre, which is becoming increasingly more popular since originally championed by Alston. Both Choo and Alston argue that it is reasonable to stay steadfast in one's religious beliefs when there are no commensurable ways of evaluating the disputant's claims. This paper first describes four views about disagreement that inform Choo's conclusion, one of which is the incommensurability argument similarly championed by Alston. Incommensurability arguments are attractive, but, when deployed in the most challenging disagreements, ultimately complacent. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Topoi: An International Review of Philosophy is a copyright of Springer, 2021. All Rights Reserved. item: Topoi: An International Review of Philosophy holder: Springer Nature dt: @attributes: year: 2021 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|