Abstract:  Richard Feldman's Uniqueness Thesis holds that "a body of evidence justifies at most one proposition out of a competing set of propositions". The opposing position, permissivism, allows distinct 
rational agents to adopt differing attitudes towards a proposition given the same body of evidence. We assess various motivations that have been offered for Uniqueness, including: concerns about achieving 
consensus, a strong form of evidentialism, worries about epistemically arbitrary influences on belief, a focus on truth-conduciveness, and consequences for peer disagreement. We argue that each of these 
motivations either misunderstands the commitments of permissivism or is question-begging. Better understanding permissivism makes it a much more plausible position.