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
    Abandoning standards wholesale conflates the failure of a... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→McCloskey's philosophical position that epistemological standards should be abandoned is hard to defend

    Abandoning standards wholesale conflates the failure of a specific standard with the impossibility of any normative epistemological criteria.

    ?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.Historical cases show specific standards (phlogiston theory, geocentrism) failed without invalidating the entire concept of rational evaluation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Logical distinction exists between 'this criterion failed' and 'all criteria are impossible'—conflating them commits a composition fallacy.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Even radical skeptics implicitly rely on standards when arguing against standards, suggesting some normative criteria are unavoidable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The claim assumes standards are separable from their historical instantiations, but perhaps all standards are equally theory-laden and revisable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Distinguishing 'a standard failed' from 'standards are impossible' may itself beg the question by presupposing standards can have identity across contexts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Some epistemologists argue that without ground-level justification, any appeal to 'normative criteria' simply relocates the problem rather than solving it.
      ?

      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

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedSkepticism1 linked

    Related

    Distinguishing 'a standard failed' from 'standards are impossible' may itself be...Even radical skeptics implicitly rely on standards when arguing against standard...Historical cases show specific standards (phlogiston theory, geocentrism) failed...Logical distinction exists between 'this criterion failed' and 'all criteria are...
    +3 moreShow less
    McCloskey's philosophical position that epistemological standards should be aban...Some epistemologists argue that without ground-level justification, any appeal t...The claim assumes standards are separable from their historical instantiations, ...

    Details

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