A colleague with your training, your information and your thinking time reaches the opposite conclusion. Conciliationism says that is evidence you erred; the steadfast view says you may keep your confidence. Almost nobody sits at either pole. Describe the dispute one feature at a time and watch where your confidence should actually land — and what you should do on Tuesday morning.
Load a dispute
1 · Your confidence before you knew
82%
How sure you were that your call was right, before your colleague opened her mouth.
2 · Describe the disagreement
Calibrated confidence
82%no change
The common misreading
Conciliationism does not mean adopting your colleague’s conclusion. It means lowering confidence in yours — which cashes out as seeking more information, consulting a third party or choosing the more reversible option. Not as flipping your vote.
3 · And if the disagreement is about which theory is right?
Uncertainty about the facts is one thing; uncertainty about which moral theory is correct is another. Set what each family of reasons recommends.