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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that A rule whose reliability cannot be established without invoking that very rule fails the reflective access condition, regardless of whether reliability is assumed in premises or embedded in the rule itself.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Some rules (like logic itself) are foundational; requiring external justification leads to infinite regress or arbitrariness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Circularity in rules differs from circular reasoning: using a rule within its own domain need not be epistemically vicious.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Reflective access may require only coherence and self-consistency, not independence from the rule being evaluated.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Reflective access requires justification independent of the rule itself, else we merely assume what needs proving.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Circular reasoning—whether in premises or embedded in rules—fails to establish legitimacy of the rule being justified.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A rule's reliability cannot ground itself; external epistemic standards are necessary to validate any inferential tool.
      ?

      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.