
In this paper I introduce and analyze two different ways to explain the phenomenon of the disagreement; one is the modern philosophical tradition, and the other is related to argumentation theories. In first place, I explain what a defective explanation of the disagreement is. In second place, I make a relation between this kind of explanation and the reflections of Descartes, Locke, Hobbes, and Leibniz regarding the disagreement. In third place, I invoke the ideas of Popper and Toulmin to understand why those modern philosophers explained the disagreement in such a way. Finally, I introduce some non-defective explanations of the disagreement, related to the argumentation theories, as a different and most accurate framework to explain the disagreement.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
