Katherine Valde

The timing of the origin of flowering plants (Angiosperm) is hotly debated. It has been suggested that the disagreement between the fossil record of angiosperm origin strongly conflicts with the origin estimates generated by molecular clocks. I argue that this conflict reveals lessons about whether or under what conditions scientific disagreement is likely to bear fruit. Specifically, I point to issues of evidence quality and social epistemic structures which deserve more attention in understanding the productivity of disagreement.

Metaphysical dialetheism is the belief that there are contradictions in the world. I will argue that metaphysical dialetheism is, rightfully understood, the most controversial form of dialetheism, and further that it remains an open possibility. Dialetheism can come in many different forms, but all share the same belief in “dialethas”. Depending on how we understand what it means to be a contradiction, we will develop correspondingly different understandings of dialetheism. I will explore what different versions of the position might look like, and how some of these versions of dialetheism could be more plausible than others, and argue that metaphysical dialetheism is the most interesting form of dialetheism. While few authors have considered the possibility of metaphysical dialetheism, there are some important arguments against the position to consider. Frederick Kroon argued in his 2004 article, _Realism and Dialetheism_, that in so far as we find arguments for dialetheism persuasive, we also have good reason to reject realism. Tumoas Tahko argued against the possibility of metaphysical dialetheism by explicitly arguing for a metaphysical definition of contradiction, and a metaphysical version of LNC. Graham Priest also challenged the idea of a “consistent” metaphysics in principle. This paper will take up all of these challenges, and defend the possibility of a metaphysical dialetheist position.