Objections

Abstract

The Equal Weight View of disagreement claims that what you are justified in believing in the face of disagreement is entirely a matter of your higher-order evidence. We have seen that in idealized disagreements this view calls for splitting the difference. In everyday contexts, this view mandates skepticism regarding controversial propositions. According to the Equal Weight View, what you are justified in believing about a proposition depends upon what you are justified in believing about the results of the epistemic election regarding that proposition. For controversial propositions (like many in politics, religion, science, and philosophy), you should be skeptical about the results of the epistemic election. So, for those controversial propositions, the Equal Weight View mandates adopting a skeptical attitude toward them. In this chapter, we will examine several objections to the Equal Weight View with respect to these verdicts regarding everyday disagreements.