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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that A criterion defining good arguments solely through belief-justification systematically misevaluates arguments that are excellent by their own proper dialectical standards.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Dialectical standards themselves ultimately concern whether interlocutors have good reasons to accept conclusions, making justification foundational.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Claims that arguments excel 'by their own standards' risk circular reasoning unless those standards are independently justified as legitimate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Distinguishing 'proper dialectical standards' from belief-justification requires showing why misevaluation occurs—the claim itself assumes the answer.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Rhetorical, dialectical, and pedagogical excellences are distinct from epistemic justification and require independent evaluative criteria.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.An argument can effectively advance collaborative inquiry or expose hidden assumptions while failing to transmit justified belief.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Reducing argument evaluation to belief-justification privileges epistemology over other legitimate evaluative purposes arguments serve.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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