ABSTRACT
Chapter 3 explains the basic nomenclature and highlights the intuitions regarding peer disagreement and the epistemic effects of risk. The goal of this chapter is to justify a local skepticism, i.e., an epistemic diffidence based on two features of concrete dialectical engagements: the cost of being wrong in one’s judgment that a particular action is permissible to perform, and the epistemic pressure that peer disagreement exerts on my moral beliefs. Why there is such ‘pressure’ is explained with reference to intellectual virtues.
