Abstract

In the deep disagreements characterized by Robert Fogelin (1985/2005) the parties do not share a common framework sufficient for the argumentative exchange to actually occur. Arguments are present as propositional structu-res, but do not develop as activity. Some public debates, particularly those that appeal to a resolution through the knowledge provided by science, can be reconstructed from the perspective of this model. Can scientific evidence be constructed from which to build, at least partially, that necessary common framework? Which notion of objectivity is the most adequate for this purpose? Fogelin’s proposal is a starting point to reflect on the resolution of disagree-ments and scientific knowledge, in particular from the notions of incommen-surability and objectivity. It is argued that objectivity in scientific activity resul-ting from the conditions that allow negotiating meanings can work to resolve some deep disagreements.