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 general justification of analogical reasoning cannot support all arguments that conform to the abstract analogical schema without proving too much.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.A justification schema need not endorse every instantiation; formal logic justifies modus ponens without endorsing every argument using it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The standard for 'proving too much' applies to content-neutral rules, but analogical reasoning schemas are inherently content-sensitive and self-limiting.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Hempel's account of inductive systematization shows that general epistemic justifications can incorporate internal criteria that screen out weak instances.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Mill's methods provide a general justification for causal inference without endorsing spurious correlations, establishing a precedent for discriminating general schemas.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The existence of bad analogical arguments establishes the need for evaluative criteria within a general justification, not the impossibility of one.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Generality requires an abstract characterization of analogical arguments such that many analogical arguments conforming to the schema are bad arguments.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A justification that supports every argument conforming to the schema would thereby endorse bad arguments.
      ?

      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.