Preview
Creation Date
10-25-2023
Description
The problem of religious peer disagreement is this: suppose there are people that are your "epistemic peers" - they are just as intelligent, informed, and sincere as you - but they reject your religious beliefs. Does the existence of skeptical epistemic peers force Christians to withhold or evidentially support their religious beliefs? In this paper, I critique Harold Netland's work on religious peer disagreement on three fronts: (1) his identification of epistemic peers, (2) his understanding of the epistemic implications of religious peer disagreement, and (3) the viability of his demand for additional evidence as a response to instances of peer disagreement.