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 proposition incompatible with prior concessions should ... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→A proposition must be denied as incompatibly relevant if it is incompatible with the positum together with a proposition that would be true if the positum were true.

    A proposition incompatible with prior concessions should be denied on those grounds alone, without appeal to what 'would be true' under hypothetical conditions.

    ?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.Logical consistency is a fundamental requirement for rational discourse; violating it undermines the coherence of one's entire position.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Appeals to hypothetical conditions can rationalize away contradictions; direct consistency demands are more epistemically honest and enforceable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Prior concessions represent actual commitments made; they bind us more strongly than speculative claims about counterfactual scenarios.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Truth conditions are sometimes context-dependent; a proposition false in the actual world might be true given relevant background assumptions we should clarify.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Rejecting propositions solely for consistency without examining whether background conditions have changed risks dogmatism and prevents rational revision.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Hypothetical conditions illuminate whether apparent contradictions reflect genuine incompatibility or merely differ in scope, domain, or presuppositions.
      ?

      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

    Modality & Possibility1 linkedPhilosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    A proposition must be denied as incompatibly relevant if it is incompatible with...Appeals to hypothetical conditions can rationalize away contradictions; direct c...Hypothetical conditions illuminate whether apparent contradictions reflect genui...Logical consistency is a fundamental requirement for rational discourse; violati...
    +3 moreShow less
    Prior concessions represent actual commitments made; they bind us more strongly ...Rejecting propositions solely for consistency without examining whether backgrou...Truth conditions are sometimes context-dependent; a proposition false in the act...

    Details

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