This is the standard academic philosophy viewpoint, but it makes no sense. What you need are principled people with a vested interest in intellectual honesty an

This is the standard academic philosophy viewpoint, but it makes no sense. What you need are principled people with a vested interest in intellectual honesty and making a real difference. Progress simply isn't made by optimizing for disagreements, in any field. Heck, there are theorems that prove rational people always end up agreeing about probabilities assigned to (non-normative) statements; if you hire people who don't agree as a matter of course, you've also proven them to be poor at thinking. There are good, working systems to copy and steal from. Hire people from the Effective Altruism community if you want an easy solution with a very high chance of success. Remember that Democracy is about consensus in spite of disagreement, not in search of it.