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 philosophical argument need not be explicitly listed as... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→There is no clearly articulated full set of premises for a 'Hegelian' ontological argument.

    A philosophical argument need not be explicitly listed as numbered premises to constitute a clearly articulable ontological argument recoverable from the text.

    ?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.Philosophical arguments often operate implicitly; recovering structure requires interpretive work consistent with rigorous hermeneutics.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Explicit numbering is a pedagogical convention, not a requirement for logical validity or philosophical significance of an argument.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Many canonical philosophical texts present arguments through narrative, dialogue, or sustained reasoning without formal enumeration.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Without explicit structure, distinguishing the author's actual argument from reader projection becomes epistemically unreliable and contestable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Reconstructing unstated premises introduces interpretive gaps where multiple, incompatible arguments could plausibly be 'recovered' from the same text.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Clarity requires making implicit reasoning explicit; calling implicit arguments 'clearly articulable' conflates potential intelligibility with actual clarity.
      ?

      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

    1 topic

    Natural Theology1 linked

    Related

    Clarity requires making implicit reasoning explicit; calling implicit arguments ...Explicit numbering is a pedagogical convention, not a requirement for logical va...Many canonical philosophical texts present arguments through narrative, dialogue...Philosophical arguments often operate implicitly; recovering structure requires ...
    +3 moreShow less
    Reconstructing unstated premises introduces interpretive gaps where multiple, in...There is no clearly articulated full set of premises for a 'Hegelian' ontologica...Without explicit structure, distinguishing the author's actual argument from rea...

    Details

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