Made available in DSpace on 2015-04-14T13:55:12Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1
437787.pdf: 1445433 bytes, checksum: 202249ebcaba133bfd8817696f198554 (MD5)
Previous issue date: 2012-03-23 / This essay is about the contemporary epistemological debate over the problem of rational disagreement. The problem consists in questioning the possibility of rational disagreement between individuals, considered epistemic peers, who, after sharing the relevant evidence, come to incompatible conclusions. Disagreements of this kind abound in contexts such as political, moral, scientific, philosophical, religious, ordinary, etc. The current debate about rational disagreement has divided philosophers into two distinct positions, namely, conformists and nonconformists. According to conformists, in the face of a disagreement with an epistemic peer the rational attitude that we should adopt is to considerably revise our initial position, and in some cases even adopt the attitude of withholding. Nonconformists, conversely, argue that in many cases it is possible to reasonably maintain the initial position even in the presence of an epistemic peer that is holding the opposite claim. In this sense, the main motivation of nonconformists is to avoid the local skepticism advocated by conformists. The present work aims to advance a study on the nature and epistemic significance of the problem of rational disagreement, analyzing the argumentation involved in positions for and against rational disagreement and exposing the presuppositions and thesis on which the argumentation rests. From this, we consider the contemporary issue specifically in the context of science. During periods of controversy, scientists exhibit considerable disagreements. To the extent that such cases present the conditions to invoke the contemporary debate about disagreement, we analyze the plausibility of the conformist verdict, specifically, in the scientific context. / Este ensaio trata do debate epistemol?gico contempor?neo sobre o problema do desacordo racional. O problema consiste na pergunta sobre a possibilidade do desacordo racional entre indiv?duos, considerados pares epist?micos, que, ap?s compartilharem a evid?ncia relevante, chegaram a conclus?es incompat?veis. Desacordos desse tipo s?o abundantes em contextos como o pol?tico, moral, cient?fico, filos?fico, religioso, ordin?rio, etc. O debate atual sobre o problema do desacordo racional dividiu os fil?sofos em duas posi??es distintas, a saber, conformistas e n?o-conformistas. De acordo com conformistas, em face de um desacordo com um par epist?mico, a atitude racional que devemos adotar ? rever, consideravelmente, a nossa posi??o inicial e, em alguns casos, at? mesmo adotar a atitude de suspens?o de ju?zo. N?o-conformistas, por sua vez, argumentam que em muitos casos ? poss?vel manter, racionalmente, a posi??o inicial, mesmo na presen?a de um par epist?mico que sustenta uma posi??o contr?ria. Neste sentido, a principal motiva??o de n?o-conformistas ? evitar o ceticismo local defendido por conformistas. O presente trabalho promove um estudo sobre a natureza e o significado epist?mico do problema do desacordo racional, analisando a argumenta??o envolvida nas posi??es pr? e contra o desacordo racional e expondo os pressupostos e teses sobre os quais tal argumenta??o repousa. A partir disso, considera-se a problem?tica contempor?nea especificamente no contexto da ci?ncia. Durante per?odos de controv?rsia, cientistas exibem desacordos consider?veis. Na medida em que tais casos apresentam as condi??es para se colocar o debate contempor?neo sobre o desacordo, analisa-se a plausibilidade do veredito conformista, especificamente, no contexto cient?fico.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:IBICT/oai:tede2.pucrs.br:tede/2886 |
| Date | 23 March 2012 |
| Creators | Junges, Alexandre Luis |
| Contributors | Almeida, Cl?udio Gon?alves de |
| Publisher | Pontif?cia Universidade Cat?lica do Rio Grande do Sul, Programa de P?s-Gradua??o em Filosofia, PUCRS, BR, Faculdade de Filosofia e Ci?ncias Humanas |
| Source Sets | IBICT Brazilian ETDs |
| Language | Portuguese |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion, info:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesis |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Source | reponame:Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da PUC_RS, instname:Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul, instacron:PUC_RS |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
| Relation | -8305327606432166393, 500, 600, 1531447313960029988 |
Page generated in 0.0029 seconds