The problem of disappointment – that different tests give different results – is well known to vaccine researchers. It seems that the awareness of disagreements, at least in many cases, can give a strong reason to think that faith is false. When you learned that your sister thought the piano was in the cave rather than in the living room, you have a good reason to think that it really wasn`t in the living room, because you know very well that your sister is a generally intelligent person who has a proper background experience (she also lived in the house) and who is about as honest. , frank and good to remember the events of childhood as they are. If, in the face of all this, you stick to your belief that the piano was in the living room, will your maintenance of that faith be reasonable? We often disagree. You may think that nuclear energy is so volatile that no nuclear power plant should be built in the near future. But you know that there are a lot of people who disagree with you on this issue. You don`t agree with your sister regarding the location of the piano in your parents` house, thinking it was in the primary living room and they think it was in the little cave. You and many others believe that Jesus Christ rose from the dead; Millions more disagree. And so the reaction seems to be to be discouraged from differences of opinion. And there are a few who disagree on that, but they can`t do anything.
Hermione remembered it and realized that his silence had been caused by his disagreement. Weight equality is perhaps the most debated opinion on the epistemic importance of differences of opinion. Competing views of peer disputes are better understood as a rejection of different aspects of weight equality, so it is an appropriate place to begin our review. From our point of view, the Equal Weight View is a combination of three assertions: the phenomenon of differences of opinion is therefore a skeptical threat: for many of our valued beliefs. If we are not protected, we know that there are many controversies about these beliefs, even among the smartest people who have worked the hardest to discover the truth of the matter. There is good reason to believe that it is irrational to keep faith in this kind of controversy in the face of this kind of controversy, and a belief that is irrational is not knowledge. It follows that our convictions, which we recognize as controversial, are not limited to knowledge. This is the threat of disagreements of skepticism (Frances 2018, 2013, 2005; Christensen 2009; 2010 Smoke; Goldberg 2009, 2013b; Kornblith 2010, 2013; Lammenranta 2011, 2013; Machuca 2013).
A child thinks that hell is a real place in the middle of the earth. You do not agree. This is a case where you disagree with someone you recognize as your epistemic subordinate in the question of whether “ (B) is true. They think Babe Ruth was the greatest baseball player of all time. We learn that a sports writer, who has written several books on the history of baseball, disagrees and says that somehow it was the greatest. In this case, you will notice that you do not agree with an epistemic superior in this matter, because you know that you are only an amateur when it comes to baseball.