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 hypothesis being plausible means the hypothesis has epistemic support warranting further investigation.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Plausibility judgments are often products of cognitive biases like representativeness heuristics, not genuine epistemic support.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Kahneman and Tversky demonstrated that perceived plausibility systematically diverges from probabilistic warrant.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Directing inquiry based on biased plausibility assessments can entrench false hypotheses rather than advance knowledge.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Peirce distinguished abductive plausibility from evidential support, treating it as a pragmatic prompt, not an epistemic credential.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A hypothesis can merit investigation purely on grounds of economy or testability, independent of any prior epistemic support.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Conflating pragmatic reasons to investigate with epistemic warrant commits a category error between the context of discovery and justification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.To say a hypothesis is plausible is to convey that we have some reason to believe it even prior to testing.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Within an inquiry, asserting plausibility suggests we have reason to investigate the hypothesis further.
      ?

      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.