Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    A condition that fails to distinguish between remote and ... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→The skeptic cannot require that in order for S to know something, if it were false S would not still believe it, because this requirement is too strong

    A condition that fails to distinguish between remote and proximate possibilities cannot serve as a plausible epistemic norm.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Epistemic norms should guide practical action; conflating remote and proximate possibilities leads to paralyzing over-caution.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Rational agents intuitively distinguish near-term from distant risks when forming justified beliefs about what to do now.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A norm indifferent to modal distance collapses into skepticism, making knowledge of anything contingent practically impossible.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The distinction between remote and proximate possibilities is vague and context-dependent, not objectively determinate for all cases.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Rigorous epistemic norms need not track practical urgency; warranted belief can be independent of whether acting matters soon.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Some legitimate epistemic standards (e.g., logical consistency) operate without reference to temporal or modal distance at all.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    1 topic

    Skepticism1 linked

    Related

    A norm indifferent to modal distance collapses into skepticism, making knowledge...Epistemic norms should guide practical action; conflating remote and proximate p...Rational agents intuitively distinguish near-term from distant risks when formin...Rigorous epistemic norms need not track practical urgency; warranted belief can ...
    +3 moreShow less
    Some legitimate epistemic standards (e.g., logical consistency) operate without ...The distinction between remote and proximate possibilities is vague and context-...The skeptic cannot require that in order for S to know something, if it were fal...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)