Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that A purported explanation that deploys categorically inapplicable concepts fails to render the explanandum genuinely comprehensible.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Metaphorical or analogical explanations use 'inapplicable' concepts yet successfully enhance comprehension across diverse domains and audiences.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Category boundaries are often conventional and revisable; concepts deemed 'inapplicable' today may become legitimate tomorrow as frameworks evolve.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Comprehensibility is context-dependent and scalar rather than binary; partial understanding via imperfect concepts outweighs no explanation at all.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Comprehension requires mapping explanans to explanandum via shared conceptual frameworks; categorically inapplicable concepts break this mapping.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Using concepts outside their proper domain (e.g., 'moral weight' for electrons) obscures rather than clarifies the target phenomenon.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Genuine understanding demands that explanatory terms be legitimately applicable to the subject matter being explained.
?
How convincing is this?
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.