This chapter argues for the incoherence of unrestricted conciliatory views according to which one ought always to modify one's view in the direction of one's peer in cases of peer disagreement. It contends that such views face incoherence when applied to themselves, and goes on to defend a partly-conciliatory view, recommending conciliation on topics other than disagreement itself.
Keywords: peer disagreement; conciliation; self-undermining views; incoherence
Chapter. 4399 words.
Subjects: Moral Philosophy
Full text: subscription required