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 that is part of a genuine option and is intellectually open may be believed even in the absence of sufficient evidence

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.W.K. Clifford argued that believing without sufficient evidence weakens one's capacity for critical evaluation, corrupting epistemic habits over time.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A principle permitting belief beyond evidence, if universalized, licenses mutually contradictory religious and metaphysical commitments simultaneously.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The social harm from normalized under-evidenced belief extends beyond the individual believer, violating duties Clifford grounds in epistemic ethics.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.James's 'genuine option' criterion is itself underdetermined: reasonable agents systematically disagree about which options are truly forced and momentous.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the classification of an option as 'genuine' is itself contested, James's framework provides no neutral procedure to resolve first-order disputes about when the will to believe applies.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.James's Will to Believe argument holds that any hypothesis forming part of a genuine option may be believed without sufficient evidence
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The hypothesis must be intellectually open
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.No rule of morality or rationality is violated by accepting a genuine and open hypothesis
      ?

      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.