Disagreement, Deference, and Religious Commitment
John Pittard
Reviews and Awards
"...the depth and scope of the book's many arguments facilitate a fecund account that clarifies central issues for future disagreements about religious disagreement. It is essential reading for scholars of disagreement and religion alike." -- Michael Pope, European Journal for Philosophy of Religion
"Pittard's book is a valuable contribution to the large and growing body of literature regarding agreement and disagreement. It is the most complete and detailed account of how and why to resist strong conciliationism. Most convincing, to my mind, is the role that rational insight can play in a full account of the matter, and Pittard's account of this role will be part of must-read literature for any future discussions of these issues." -- Jonathan Kvanvig, International Journal for the Study of Skepticism
"To say that this is a book in religious epistemology is slightly misleading. For this book is, I think, required reading for any epistemologist working on disagreement. Likewise, given the sceptical threat to religious belief posed by conciliationism I also think that this book is required reading for the philosopher of religion. To genuinely engage two subdisciplines in philosophy in one unified project is an impressive feat in itself. My sense is that Disagreement, Deference, and Religious Commitment is just the beginning for Pittard. I highly recommend it and I look forward to reading more of his work." -- Kirk Lougheed, Faith and Philosophy
"John Pittard's book focuses on religious commitment, but his volume is also an impressive examination of the broader epistemological issues in play. It is the most thorough scholarly treatment yet of how to think about the epistemology of disagreement as it applies to the rationality of religious belief in an increasingly pluralistic world. Readers who are less interested in the epistemology of religion will nevertheless be rewarded by Pittard's carefully developed insights on disagreement and its lessons for mainstream epistemology." -- Matthew A. Benton, Notre Dame Philosophical Review