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
    All defeating evidence functions by reducing the epistemi... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Self-doubting higher-order evidence requires the subject to bracket her first-order evidence in a way that other defeating evidence does not.

    All defeating evidence functions by reducing the epistemic weight of prior evidence, making bracketing a matter of degree rather than kind.

    ?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.Evidence always operates within comparative frameworks where new information shifts relative credibility rather than absolutely eliminating prior beliefs.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Empirically, people adjust confidence gradually when encountering counterevidence, suggesting bracketing is continuous rather than categorical.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.No evidence logically entails absolute rejection; even strong counterevidence permits rational residual credence in prior positions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Some evidence genuinely defeats priors categorically—logical contradictions or demonstration of source unreliability can eliminate positions entirely.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Conflating 'degree of credence reduction' with 'no kind distinction' obscures genuine epistemic thresholds where rational agents must stop believing.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Gradual confidence shifts during deliberation differ categorically from justified final bracketing once sufficient defeating evidence accumulates.
      ?

      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

    Conflating 'degree of credence reduction' with 'no kind distinction' obscures ge...Empirically, people adjust confidence gradually when encountering counterevidenc...Evidence always operates within comparative frameworks where new information shi...Gradual confidence shifts during deliberation differ categorically from justifie...
    +3 moreShow less
    No evidence logically entails absolute rejection; even strong counterevidence pe...Self-doubting higher-order evidence requires the subject to bracket her first-or...Some evidence genuinely defeats priors categorically—logical contradictions or d...

    Details

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