The issue of peer disagreement in epistemology discusses the question of how a person should respond when he learns that somebody else with the same body of knowledge disagrees with them.
The second type of disagreements is about a proposed course of action, for example, whether one should travel to Italy or Greece.
This is the case where the two disputants are epistemic peers -- they have roughly the same capabilities in terms of information and intelligence.
Conciliationism contends that a person must consider his peer belief as equally valid as his own.
[2][4] This school contends that a person must adhere to his own original belief notwithstanding his knowledge of a disagreeing peer.