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
    Accounts of the world based on divine revelation are epis... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Accounts of the world based on divine revelation are epistemically unwarranted for humans.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Any claimed revelation must be interpreted through fallible human cognitive and linguistic faculties before it can yield propositional content.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Fallible interpretation of a source cannot produce a less fallible epistemic product than the interpretive faculties themselves permit.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore revelation-based accounts inherit the same inferential limitations Alcmaeon identifies in ordinary perceptual reasoning.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Competing religious traditions advance mutually contradictory revelation-based claims with equal internal confidence, as Xenophanes observed of culturally variable god-concepts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.When equally confident testimony-based methods systematically yield contradictory conclusions, no non-circular criterion drawn from within any single tradition can adjudicate between them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Epistemically unwarranted belief-forming methods are precisely those that cannot be validated without circularity or independent evidential grounding humans demonstrably lack.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Humans must draw inferences from perceptual signs rather than claim certainty.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Claims based on divine revelation assert a certainty humans cannot possess.
      ?

      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.

    Topics

    SkepticismNatural Theology

    Connections

    2 topics

    Perception1 linkedReligious Experience1 linked

    Related

    Any claimed revelation must be interpreted through fallible human cognitive and ...Claims based on divine revelation assert a certainty humans cannot possess.Competing religious traditions advance mutually contradictory revelation-based c...Epistemically unwarranted belief-forming methods are precisely those that cannot...
    +4 moreShow less
    Fallible interpretation of a source cannot produce a less fallible epistemic pro...Humans must draw inferences from perceptual signs rather than claim certainty.Therefore revelation-based accounts inherit the same inferential limitations Alc...

    Similar

    Claims based on divine revelation assert a certainty humans cannot pos...85%Apart from divine revelation, apodictic certainty about things that ex...78%Apodictic certainty about external things is unavailable except throug...77%It is not plausible that the actual world, or any world remotely like ...77%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: alcmaeon
    View source passageHide passage
    Such skepticism about human knowledge is characteristic of one strand of early Greek thought. Both Alcmaeon’s predecessors (e.g., Xenophanes B34) and his successors (e.g., Philolaus B6) made similar contrasts between divine and human knowledge, but in Alcmaeon’s case, as in these other cases, we do not have enough evidence to be sure what he intended. Most of the subjects that Alcmaeon went on to discuss in his book could not be settled by a direct appeal to sense perception (e.g., the functioni
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    When equally confident testimony-based methods systematically yield contradictor...
    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit