In the second part, the author examines epistemic peer disagreement. He argues that the epistemic significance of this does not only rely on the way in which an agent should revise her belief in the face of disagreement. It also relies on the way in which an agent should act. This establishes the epistemic significance of belief-influencing actions and omissions under certain conditions. This book deals with questions of meliorative epistemology in general and with questions concerning doxastic responsibility and epistemic responsibility assessment in particular. It will appeal to graduate students and researchers with an interest in epistemology. weiterlesen