Modes de pensée, modes de croyances et modes d’argumentation. Un point de vue d’épistémologie sociale rationaliste

One often speaks of “dialogues of the deaf” whose origin would be the too great difference between modes of thought, especially in ethics or in politics. In order to clarify this issue, I suggest to distinguish between three notions: modes of thought in a strict sense, modes of beliefs and modes of argumentation. I explain these notions at length by taking examples chosen either at the local level (e.g. social conflicts within companies) or at the global level (in particular religious and political conflicts involving references to Islamic doctrines). By adopting a critical rationalist viewpoint in social epistemology, I try to identify the conditions that would make agreements possible without restricting them to mere compromises.