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 kind defined solely by inductive success conflates epis... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Natural kinds should be understood as kinds that support induction and explanation, where generalisations need not be exceptionless.

    A kind defined solely by inductive success conflates epistemic convenience with ontological category membership.

    ?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.Inductive success measures predictive utility, not truth about what exists. Utility and ontology are distinct categories.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Multiple incompatible theories can be equally inductively successful. Ontological kinds should not be multiply realizable this way.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A kind's membership should depend on intrinsic properties, not observer convenience. Inductive success is observer-relative.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.All access to ontology is mediated through inductive inference. The distinction between epistemic and ontological is unworkable here.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Natural kinds like 'species' are identified by convergent inductive success across domains, not by metaphysical essence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Objects just are whatever stable patterns we reliably track. 'Convenience' and 'reality' collapse in a post-essentialist framework.
      ?

      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

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedCausation1 linked

    Related

    A kind's membership should depend on intrinsic properties, not observer convenie...All access to ontology is mediated through inductive inference. The distinction ...Inductive success measures predictive utility, not truth about what exists. Util...Multiple incompatible theories can be equally inductively successful. Ontologica...
    +3 moreShow less
    Natural kinds like 'species' are identified by convergent inductive success acro...Natural kinds should be understood as kinds that support induction and explanati...Objects just are whatever stable patterns we reliably track. 'Convenience' and '...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit