Deep Disagreement: From Toy Examples to Pragmatic Solutions
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54536/ijsscs.v2i2.7852Keywords:
Deep Disagreement, Great Attractor, Hinge Epistemology, Pragmatic Resolution, TrialogueAbstract
This paper looks at the ongoing problem of “Deep Disagreement.” These arguments are based on deep-rooted beliefs that are difficult to solve with normal reasoning. This study begins with Robert Fogelin’s idea that these disagreements lead to a standstill in arguments. It points out that simple philosophical examples show how these disagreements work but do not offer real solutions. By looking at real-world cases, such as the 2001 Macedonian conflict, this study suggests that we need to move from focusing on evidence to being more practical. The author introduces a new way to solve these disagreements called the “Great Attractor” and the “Trialogue.” This approach adds a third party to help guide the argument towards a common goal. The paper concludes that Deep Disagreement is due to the way arguments are structured, not because people are irrational. This suggests that solutions are possible by changing the structure of arguments to avoid deep-rooted conflicts.
References
Alston, W. P. (1986). Epistemic Circularity. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 47 (1),1-30.
Banchuk-Petrosova, O. S. O., & Dobkina, K. (2025). Mediation and arbitration in international negotiations: The role of third parties in conflict resolution. Society and Security, 6(12), 14–19. https://doi.org/10.26642/sas-2025-6(12)-14-19
Banda, J. H. K. (2025). The politics of mediation: Analyzing the influence of international actors on domestic conflict resolution and state sovereignty. Journal of Political Science and International Relations Studies, 2(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.61784/jpsr3006
Borge, B., & Serebrinsky, D. (2025). Deep and deeper disagreements in metaphysics of science. Análisis Filosófico, 45(Special Issue), 947–975. https://doi.org/10.36446/af.e1298
Coliva, A. (2015). Extended rationality. Palgrave Macmillan.
Deni, A., Wance, M., & Muhtar, M. (2025). Moderated identity politics: Muslim voters and religious depolarization in North Maluku’s 2024 gubernatorial election. Jurnal Wacana Politik, 10(3), 302–312. https://doi.org/10.24198/jwp.v10i3.63113Fogelin, R. (1985). The logic of deep disagreement. Informal logic. Vol 7: 1-7.
Fumerton, R. (1995). Metaepistemology and skepticism. Rowman & Littlefield.
Harto, B., & Ahida, R. (2025). Scientific neutrality in the age of artificial intelligence: A critical analysis of the value-free ideal. El-Rusyd, 10(2), 179–190. https://doi.org/10.58485/elrusyd.v10i2.486
Khan, Z. A., Haq, R., Malik, F., & Shinwari, J. U. R. (2024). Kashmir at the crossroads: Analyzing third-party mediation and the India-Pakistan rivalry. Quantic Journal of Social Sciences. https://doi.org/10.55737/qjss.558722578
Khotmul, F., & Putra, A. (2025). Stakeholder roles in strengthening religious moderation: A case study of socio-religious conflict in Mesanggok Village, Gerung Subdistrict, West Lombok Regency. Journal of Nahdlatul Ulama Studies. https://doi.org/10.35672/jnus.v6i1.68-85
Marré, T. (2024). Thomas Kuhn’s quasi‐fideism. Heythrop Journal. https://doi.org/10.1111/heyj.14369
Melchior, G. (2024). The methodologically flawed discussion about deep disagreement. Episteme. https://doi.org/10.1017/epi.2024.2
Muasya, M. N., Wangai, J. K., & Makokha, K. O. (2025). Epistemic justification of Kuhn’s structures of scientific development. International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology. https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25jun745
Munir, S. (2020). Historical analysis, multi-dimensional realities and emerging frameworks: International mediation, efficacy, key challenges and state-building in Yemen’s fragile civil conflict. https://doi.org/10.31237/osf.io/m6p5d
Muriuki, C. (2022). Conflict management and conflict resolution. Journal of Developing Country Studies. https://doi.org/10.47604/jdcs.1716
Noaparast, Z. B. (2025). On deep moral disagreement between theists and atheists. Wittgenstein-Studien, 16(1), 227–244. https://doi.org/10.1515/witt-2025-0010
Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge University Press.
Pennycook, P., Tôrres, J., & Silva, M. (2026). “Eu sou homem” é uma certeza-dobradiça? Sobre gênero, antifundacionalismo, e a possibilidade de mudança de uma Weltbild. Argumentos - Revista de Filosofia, 17(2), 167–186. https://doi.org/10.36517/arf.v17i2.95347
Pritchard, D. (2025). Axiological hinge commitments. Synthese. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-024-04898-0
Ramsbotham, O. (2010). Transforming Violent Conflict: Radical Disagreement, Dialogue, and Strategic Linguistic Elaboration. Routledge.
Ranalli, C. (2018). Deep disagreement and hinge epistemology. Synthese. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-018-01956-2
Ranalli, C., & Lagewaard, T. (2022). Deep disagreement (part 2): Epistemology of deep disagreement. Philosophy Compass. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12887
Rehák, V. (2011). Mediation as a tool for conflict resolution. Czech Journal of International Relations. https://doi.org/10.32422/cjir.384
Saltelli, A., et al. (2023). Impact assessment culture in the European Union. Time for something new? Environmental Science & Policy. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2023.02.005
Schäfer, L., et al. (2026). Associations between inclusivity norms and tolerance, contact, and cooperation amid polarization: Evidence from 12 European countries. PNAS Nexus. https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgag087
Dey, S. (2022). Analysing the Sri Lankan civil war through the lens of conflict resolution theory. Stosunki Międzynarodowe – International Relations, 2(2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.12688/stomiedintrelat.17410.1Stopford, R. (2020). Threshold concepts and certainty: A critical analysis of “troublesomeness.” Higher Education. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-020-00628-w
Susskind, L. & Cruikshank, J. (1987). Breaking the Impasse: Consensual approaches to resolving public disputes. Basic Books.
William, A., Ndikum, N. C., & Mengjo, L. K. (2025). External interference and conflict management: The case of the Anglophone conflict in the North-West and South-West regions. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science. https://doi.org/10.47772/ijriss.2025.90400477
Zartman, W. (1989). Ripe for Resolution: Conflict and Intervention in Africa (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Vesel Memedi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.