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 valid argument with accidentally true premises yields n... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→An argument is sound when it is both valid and has true premises

    A valid argument with accidentally true premises yields no genuine epistemic justification, making 'soundness' epistemically hollow without a knowledge condition.

    ?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.Epistemic justification requires a proper causal connection between belief and truth, not mere logical validity plus accident.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A reasoner who believes via accidentally true premises is indistinguishable from someone reasoning from falsehoods—epistemically.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Soundness guarantees truth preservation but not rational warrant; these are distinct epistemic goods.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Justification concerns the quality of reasoning process, not metaphysical luck about premise truth. Soundness captures this quality.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Adding a knowledge condition conflates justification with infallibility; justified believers can hold false beliefs through no fault.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If accidentally true premises yield no justification, then most historical scientific knowledge wouldn't count—an implausible result.
      ?

      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.

    Key Terms

    knowledge(Distinguished from mere true belief, which may be the product of indoctrination and need not exercise deliberative capacities.)
    Justified true belief — true belief that has been arrived at through the exercise of deliberative capacities, including comparison of and deliberation among alternatives.

    Connections

    1 topic

    Truth & Knowledge1 linked

    Related

    A reasoner who believes via accidentally true premises is indistinguishable from...Adding a knowledge condition conflates justification with infallibility; justifi...An argument is sound when it is both valid and has true premisesEpistemic justification requires a proper causal connection between belief and t...
    +3 moreShow less
    If accidentally true premises yield no justification, then most historical scien...Justification concerns the quality of reasoning process, not metaphysical luck a...Soundness guarantees truth preservation but not rational warrant; these are dist...

    Details

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