Hrishikesh Joshi
Bowling Green State University
The American political landscape exhibits significant polarization. People’s political beliefs cluster around two main camps. However, many of the issues with respect to which these two camps disagree seem to be rationally orthogonal. This feature raises an epistemic challenge for the political partisan. If she is justified in consistently adopting the party line, it must be true that her side is reliable on the issues that are the subject of disagreements. It would then follow that the other side is anti-reliable with respect to a host of orthogonal political issues. Yet, it is difficult to find a psychologically plausible explanation for why one side would get things reliably wrong with respect to a wide range of orthogonal issues. While this project’s empirical discussion focuses on the US context, the argument generalizes to any situation where political polarization exists on a sufficiently large number of orthogonal claims.
Keywords polarization  disagreement  epistemology  partisanship
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1177/1470594x20901346
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Language, Truth and Logic.Alfred Jules Ayer - 1936 - London: V. Gollancz.
The Enigma of Reason.Dan Sperber & Hugo Mercier (eds.) - 2017 - Cambridge, MA, USA: Harvard University Press.
Reflection and Disagreement.Adam Elga - 2007 - Noûs 41 (3):478–502.
Language, Truth, and Logic.A. J. Ayer - 1936 - Philosophy 23 (85):173-176.

View all 23 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Suspiciously Convenient Belief.Neil Levy - 2020 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 23 (5):899-913.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Epistemic Value of Partisanship.Ivan Cerovac - 2019 - Croatian Journal of Philosophy 19 (1):99-117.
In Defense of Partisanship.Neil Sinhababu - 2016 - In David Killoren, Emily Crookston & Jonathan Trerise (eds.), Ethics in Politics: New Papers on the Rights and Obligations of Political Agents. Routledge. pp. 75-90.
The Epistemic Significance of Political Disagreement.Bjørn Hallsson - 2019 - Philosophical Studies 176 (8):2187-2202.
What is the Epistemic Significance of Disagreement?Noah Gabriel Martin - 2019 - Logos and Episteme: An International Journal of Epistemology 10 (3):283–298.
Why is Collective Violence Collective?Roberta Senechal de la Roche - 2001 - Sociological Theory 19 (2):126-144.
Why Is Collective Violence Collective?Roberta Senechal de La Roche - 2001 - Sociological Theory 19 (2):126 - 144.
(More) Springs of My Discontent.Guy Axtell - 2012 - Logos and Episteme 3 (1):131-137.


Added to PP index

Total views
2,785 ( #1,405 of 2,517,841 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
108 ( #6,465 of 2,517,841 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes