Date of Award
Spring 5-11-2012
Degree Type
Honors College Thesis
Department
Philosophy and Religion
First Advisor
David M. Holley
Advisor Department
Philosophy and Religion
Abstract
In this paper, I discuss Richard Feldman’s article “Reasonable Religious Disagreement”. In his article, Feldman argues that “reasonable disagreement” is not possible between two “epistemic peers” who have shared all of their evidence. Regardless of whether Feldman’s argument is valid, the two requirements (being epistemic peers and sharing all their evidence) he sets for ruling out a disagreement as reasonable could be impossible to meet in the very situations he is writing about. I argue that in situations of religious disagreements, from the outset the parties involved have reason to judge each other not to be epistemic peers, and that there is some evidence in many religious disagreements that is both relevant to the disagreement and impossible to fully share.
Copyright
Copyright for this thesis is owned by the author. It may be freely accessed by all users. However, any reuse or reproduction not covered by the exceptions of the Fair Use or Educational Use clauses of U.S. Copyright Law or without permission of the copyright holder may be a violation of federal law. Contact the administrator if you have additional questions.
Recommended Citation
Champine, Bradley, "Questions Concerning Reasonable Religious Disagreements" (2012). Honors Theses. 21.
https://aquila.usm.edu/honors_theses/21