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 scientist can be a believer in religious tenets

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.W.K. Clifford's evidentialist principle holds that it is morally wrong to believe anything on insufficient evidence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Scientific methodology requires proportioning belief to empirical evidence, making faith-based commitments epistemically impermissible for the scientist qua scientist.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A role that structurally prohibits certain belief-forming methods cannot be coherently combined with commitments formed exclusively by those prohibited methods.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Boethius of Dacia's double-truth framework assigns religious and scientific claims to incommensurable domains of rational assessment.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If religious tenets genuinely conflict with scientific conclusions, the scientist who affirms both simultaneously violates the law of non-contradiction rather than compartmentalizing legitimately.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Compartmentalization of contradictory beliefs constitutes motivated irrationality, not genuine dual commitment, as Freud and later Festinger's cognitive dissonance research establish.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The First Cause may have inexplicable effects
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.One may believe that effects claimed by faith are real even if inexplicable and in conflict with science
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Religious tenets having no place in the sciences does not preclude a scientist from holding religious beliefs
      ?

      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.