CFP: TOPOI Special issue: Deep Disagreement and the Limits of Argumentation

For the broader intellectual community, reflecting on the current fractious intellectual climate, the notion of deep disagreement is a fecund concept. What was originally a limit idea for informal logicians, in Fogelin’s framing, has become a heuristic and explanatory tool for accounts of civilizational clash, metaphilosophical skepticism, political polarization, and the intellectual malaise of (post)modernity.

Here, we wish to collect the work of leading scholars in argumentation theory, social epistemology, and political philosophy on the questions of deep disagreement. The issue returns to the question named in its title: what becomes of the norms of argumentation at the point where argument seems to run out.

Possible topics include (but are not limited to):

• Theories of rational irresolvability
• Developments of hinge epistemology
• Implications of deep disagreement in politics
• Deep disagreement theory as metaphilosophy
• Deep disagreement and argumentative injustice
• Case studies of deep disagreements
• The role of bias in deep disagreement
• Implications of deep disagreement optimism
• Implications of deep disagreement pessimism

CONTACT: For any questions, please directly contact the editors:

• Tomáš Kollárik, [email protected]
• Scott Aikin, [email protected]

Find further information for submission at the dedicated site at the journal website for the special collection below: