 Some proponents of the variation project present us empirical evidence of disagreement between intuitions in order to motivate a version of the Argument from Intrasource Inconsistency  (§3.3.2).  Some critics of skepticism motivated by the variation project claim, contrary to what was suggested earlier  (§2.4),  that intuitions are not treated as evidence or reasons in philosophical inquiry (Deutsch 2015; Williamson 2007; Cappelen 2012). Whether such a maneuver really evades whatever skeptical implications follow from disagreement depends on whether disagreements of belief are epistemologically less troubling than variations in non-doxastic justifiers.