Тёмный
No video :(

Richard Feldman - Reasonable Religious Disagreement 

Victor Gijsbers
Подписаться 9 тыс.
Просмотров 1,3 тыс.
50% 1

Feldman's text is a chapter from the book 'Philosophers without Gods: Meditations on Atheism and the Secular Life', edited by Louise M. Antony. Feldman's is interested mainly in the possibility of rational disagreement -- religion is only an example. He argues that rational disagreement is impossible. If our epistemic continue to draw conclusions different from ours even after thoroughgoing discussion, we should give up our beliefs and suspend judgement instead.
Victor Gijsbers teaches philosophy at Leiden University in the Netherlands. This video is part of an ongoing look at various philosophical papers: • Philosophical Papers

Опубликовано:

 

6 сен 2024

Поделиться:

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист
Посмотреть позже
Комментарии : 3   
@frimports
@frimports 11 месяцев назад
How will a believer agree to suspend their belief, this is Pollyanna from Feldman and just a variation of relativism. Let’s look a another dichotomy like politics. If I’m a leftist will I convince a rightist to become a leftist? Should I attempt to do this? That my friend is the more interesting question the ethics of persuasion. At what point have I moved from a good faith actor to a manipulator? I may be persuaded today of Leftism but it wasn’t always the case, there was a time I was solidly a rightist. Oddly I like the way the apostle Paul puts it, let every man be fully persuaded in his in own mind. Was Paul a post-modernist, I don’t think so.
@clumsydad7158
@clumsydad7158 Год назад
In general people should stop arguing and judging, as there are many valid viewpoints. As nearly everything is uncertain, many good arguments can be made. One of the most abused words in discourse is "logic". People are told their arguments are not logical. But their logic is fine, it's just their premises are different. In uncertainty, we have different good premises, good reasoning, and reach different conclusions. As Shakespeare said, the world is often much ado about nothing and via Falkner a cacophony of sound and fury. Also, fyi, I think this sentence from your description is hard to understand/may have an error, fyi, "If our epistemic continue to draw conclusions different from ours even after thoroughgoing discussion, we should give up our beliefs and suspend judgement instead." Have a great day/Thank you
@toastybowl
@toastybowl Год назад
I think the standards of evidence & justification are most commonly where this becomes a problem. Let's discuss why we each interpret some factors differently...oh! They reject that idea altogether? They are even irritated by the implication that we might be epistemic peers in the first place? Cool! It's not yet really a reasonable disagreement at that point. Only what they've already brought to the table counts! We cannot discuss anything else! Ok then - I will just stop responding. 😅 It's a bit too much for me at this point.
Далее
Disagreement - Epistemology Video 21
28:46
Просмотров 688
A Minecraft Movie | Teaser
01:20
Просмотров 25 млн
Introduction to Philosophy of Religion
31:56
Просмотров 45 тыс.
Bart Ehrman: Revelations about Revelation... and more
2:10:20
Lewis Carroll - What the Tortoise Said to Achilles
19:49
Everything Wrong with the Modal Ontological Argument
20:48