Document type

Article

Version

Accepted version

Publication date

All rights reserved

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/2445/146137

Disagreement, Credences, and Outright Belief

Journal Title

Director/Tutor

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Abstract

This paper addresses a largely neglected question in ongoing debates over disagreement: what is the relation, if any, between disagreements involving credences (call them credal disagreements) and disagreements involving outright beliefs (call them full disagreements)? The first part of the paper offers some desiderata for an adequate account of credal and full disagreement. The second part of the paper argues that both phenomena can be subsumed under a schematic definition which goes as follows: A and B disagree if and only if the accuracy conditions of A's doxastic attitude are such that, if they were fulfilled, this would ipso facto make B's doxastic attitude inaccurate, or vice‐versa.

Subject (English)

Citation

Citation

PALMIRA, Michele. Disagreement, Credences, and Outright Belief. Ratio. 2018. Vol. 31, num. 2, pags. 179-196. ISSN 0034-0006. [consulted: 6 of June of 2026]. Available at: https://hdl.handle.net/2445/146137

Export metadata

JSON - METS

Share record