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 theory's intuitive appeal derives from its justificatory structure, not merely from the extension of its verdicts in particular cases.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Intuitive appeal is fundamentally responsive to particular judgments; abstract structure divorced from cases feels sterile.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
A theory's justificatory elegance can obscure counterintuitive verdicts by making bad conclusions feel inevitable and rational.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Our deepest intuitions track whether concrete outcomes match our values, not whether abstract principles cohere neatly.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Intuitive appeal persists across diverse cases only when grounded in coherent principles, not random verdicts.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
A theory's justificatory structure explains why we find it compelling; case verdicts alone cannot justify belief in it.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Theories with identical verdicts but different foundations generate different intuitive responses, showing structure matters.
?
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.