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 rule assigning zero weight to 'irrelevant' similarities would require a completed relevance theory as prerequisite, which no adequate theory yet provides.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Practical relevance judgments work reasonably well without complete theory, suggesting adequacy isn't an all-or-nothing requirement.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
The claim conflates 'complete formal theory' with 'usable relevance criteria,' but domain-specific heuristics suffice for most purposes.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Demanding perfect theory before action creates paralyzing perfectionism; approximate relevance frameworks are pragmatically defensible.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Relevance is context-dependent and multifaceted, making it resistant to complete formal specification without circularity.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Historical attempts at relevance theories (conceptual spaces, feature-matching) each face counterexamples, supporting the incompleteness claim.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Assigning zero weight without criteria risks arbitrary exclusion and may collapse reasoning into mere stipulation.
?
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.