Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Hypothesis: Accept or Fail to Reject?01:17

Hypothesis: Accept or Fail to Reject?

28.1K
The outcome of any hypothesis testing leads to rejecting or not rejecting the null hypothesis. This decision is taken based on the analysis of the data, an appropriate test statistic, an appropriate confidence level, the critical values, and P-values. However, when the evidence suggests that the null hypothesis cannot be rejected, is it right to say, 'Accept' the null hypothesis?
There are two ways to indicate that the null hypothesis is not rejected. 'Accept' the null...
28.1K
Confirmation Biases01:31

Confirmation Biases

5.5K
The confirmation bias is the tendency to focus on information that confirms our existing beliefs and ignore information that is inconsistent with our expectations. For example, if you think that your professor is not very nice, you notice all of the instances of rude behavior exhibited by the professor while ignoring the countless pleasant interactions he is involved in on a daily basis. Have you ever fallen prey to the confirmation bias, either as the source or target of such bias?
5.5K
Criticisms of the Evolutionary Perspective01:23

Criticisms of the Evolutionary Perspective

134
In a study where individuals posing as strangers offered compliments and proposed casual sex to students, the responses differed significantly based on gender. Not a single woman accepted the proposal, while 70% of the men agreed. This outcome provides a useful scenario to explore through the lens of evolutionary psychology and social learning theory, highlighting the diverse perspectives on human sexual behaviors.
Evolutionary psychology provides one explanation for these findings, suggesting...
134
Null and Alternative Hypotheses01:16

Null and Alternative Hypotheses

8.4K
The actual hypothesis testing begins by considering two hypotheses. They are termed  the null hypothesis and the alternative hypothesis. These hypotheses contain opposing viewpoints.
The null hypothesis, denoted by H0 is a statement of no difference between the variables—they are not related. This can often be considered the status quo. As  a result if you cannot accept the null, it requires some action.
The alternative hypothesis, denoted by H1 or Ha, is a claim about the...
8.4K
Cognitive Dissonance01:38

Cognitive Dissonance

32.7K
Social psychologists have documented that feeling good about ourselves and maintaining positive self-esteem is a powerful motivator of human behavior (Tavris & Aronson, 2008). In the United States, members of the predominant culture typically think very highly of themselves and view themselves as good people who are above average on many desirable traits (Ehrlinger, Gilovich, & Ross, 2005). Often, our behavior, attitudes, and beliefs are affected when we experience a threat to our...
32.7K
Agonism and Antagonism: Quantification01:14

Agonism and Antagonism: Quantification

422
When drugs are administered, they can elicit either an agonist or antagonist effect on the body. Agonism occurs when a drug activates a specific receptor, triggering a biological response. On the other hand, antagonism happens when a drug binds to the same receptors but blocks their activation, thereby preventing a biological response.
To quantify these effects, researchers use a dose-response curve, which provides valuable information about the potency and efficacy of a drug. Potency refers to...
422

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Bootstrapping and Persuasive Argumentation.

Argumentation·2024
Same author

Rationally irresolvable disagreement.

Philosophical studies·2023
Same author

Replies to the Critics of Knowing and Checking: an Epistemological Investigation.

Acta analytica : philosophy and psychology·2023
Same author

Précis on Knowing and Checking: an Epistemological Investigation.

Acta analytica : philosophy and psychology·2023
Same author

A modal theory of discrimination.

Synthese·2021
Same author

The persuasiveness puzzle about bootstrapping.

Ratio·2020
Same journal

Concept(s) of Health: Lifestyle at the Heart of Modern Health.

Erkenntnis·2026
Same journal

Common Belief and Make-Believe.

Erkenntnis·2026
Same journal

Hilbert's Early Metatheory Revisited.

Erkenntnis·2026
Same journal

Neo-Russellian Abstractionism.

Erkenntnis·2026
Same journal

Epistemic Rationality Begins Unreflectively.

Erkenntnis·2026
Same journal

Forward-Looking Concept Functions and the Function/Accident Distinction.

Erkenntnis·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jul 29, 2025

Continuous Theta Burst Stimulation of the Posterior Medial Frontal Cortex to Experimentally Reduce Ideological Threat Responses
06:42

Continuous Theta Burst Stimulation of the Posterior Medial Frontal Cortex to Experimentally Reduce Ideological Threat Responses

Published on: September 28, 2018

11.7K

Skeptical Arguments and Deep Disagreement.

Guido Melchior1

  • 1Department of Philosophy, University of Graz, Heinrichstrasse 26/5, 8010 Graz, Austria.

Erkenntnis
|May 26, 2023
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

This study reinterprets skeptical arguments, revealing limits on persuasive argumentation and deep disagreement resolution. It shows that while skeptical arguments may be unsound, they offer insights into argumentation

More Related Videos

Using Eye Movements Recorded in the Visual World Paradigm to Explore the Online Processing of Spoken Language
09:27

Using Eye Movements Recorded in the Visual World Paradigm to Explore the Online Processing of Spoken Language

Published on: October 13, 2018

10.1K
Dissociation of the Confounding Influences of Expectancy and Integrative Difficulty Residing in Anomalous Sentences in Event-related Potential Studies
05:22

Dissociation of the Confounding Influences of Expectancy and Integrative Difficulty Residing in Anomalous Sentences in Event-related Potential Studies

Published on: May 9, 2019

5.4K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jul 29, 2025

Continuous Theta Burst Stimulation of the Posterior Medial Frontal Cortex to Experimentally Reduce Ideological Threat Responses
06:42

Continuous Theta Burst Stimulation of the Posterior Medial Frontal Cortex to Experimentally Reduce Ideological Threat Responses

Published on: September 28, 2018

11.7K
Using Eye Movements Recorded in the Visual World Paradigm to Explore the Online Processing of Spoken Language
09:27

Using Eye Movements Recorded in the Visual World Paradigm to Explore the Online Processing of Spoken Language

Published on: October 13, 2018

10.1K
Dissociation of the Confounding Influences of Expectancy and Integrative Difficulty Residing in Anomalous Sentences in Event-related Potential Studies
05:22

Dissociation of the Confounding Influences of Expectancy and Integrative Difficulty Residing in Anomalous Sentences in Event-related Potential Studies

Published on: May 9, 2019

5.4K

Area of Science:

  • Epistemology
  • Philosophy of Argumentation

Background:

  • Influential skeptical arguments, including Agrippa's trilemma, meta-regress arguments, and Cartesian external world skepticism, are often considered unsound regarding knowledge claims.
  • Understanding the structure and limitations of these arguments is crucial for philosophical inquiry into knowledge and disagreement.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To provide a novel reinterpretation of key skeptical arguments.
  • To explore the implications of these reinterpretations for the theory and practice of persuasive argumentation.
  • To contribute to the understanding of deep disagreement and its resolvability.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis and reinterpretation of classical skeptical arguments (Agrippa's trilemma, meta-regress, Cartesian skepticism).
  • Examination of the preconditions and limits of persuasive argumentation.
  • Distinguishing between different types of deep disagreement based on the nature of skeptical challenges.

Main Results:

  • Skeptical arguments, though potentially unsound, illuminate the boundaries of effective persuasion.
  • A typology of deep disagreement emerges from the analysis of varied skeptical arguments.
  • Deep disagreement is fundamentally irresolvable through argumentation, according to this reinterpretation.

Conclusions:

  • The study offers a new perspective on the philosophical significance of skeptical arguments.
  • It clarifies the relationship between skepticism, argumentation, and the nature of profound disagreements.
  • The findings suggest that certain types of deep disagreement lie beyond the scope of rational resolution via argument.