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
    A thoroughgoing competence/performance distinction cannot... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Essentialist approaches to language accept a thoroughgoing competence/performance distinction

    A thoroughgoing competence/performance distinction cannot be a defining feature of essentialism if prominent essentialists explicitly reject it.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Essential features must be shared by all members of a category; if prominent essentialists reject competence/performance distinction, it cannot define essentialism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Defining doctrines by what their adherents actually believe is more reliable than imposing criteria they explicitly repudiate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Essentialism has survived and evolved despite disagreements on competence/performance, suggesting this distinction is not fundamental to it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Some prominent positions within a tradition can be unorthodox or revisionist; rejecting a standard feature doesn't prove it isn't definitional.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Essentialism might require competence/performance-like distinctions under different terminology; surface-level rejection masks deeper commitment.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Definitional features can apply to a doctrine's core logic even if some adherents deny them; historical lip-service ≠ genuine philosophical rejection.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Consciousness & Mind1 linkedPhilosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    Defining doctrines by what their adherents actually believe is more reliable tha...Definitional features can apply to a doctrine's core logic even if some adherent...Essential features must be shared by all members of a category; if prominent ess...Essentialism has survived and evolved despite disagreements on competence/perfor...
    +3 moreShow less
    Essentialism might require competence/performance-like distinctions under differ...Essentialist approaches to language accept a thoroughgoing competence/performanc...Some prominent positions within a tradition can be unorthodox or revisionist; re...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit