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
    Analogue confirmation requires a structural mapping judgm... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Analogue confirmation is not vulnerable to the Dutch Book logical difficulties that affect ampliative rules

    Analogue confirmation requires a structural mapping judgment that itself lacks evidential grounding and constitutes an ampliative inferential step.

    ?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.Structural mappings between source and target domains are stipulated by analogue reasoners, not derived from prior evidence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Analogical inference extends conclusions beyond what shared structures logically entail, making it ampliative by definition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.No independent evidence can justify which structural features are relevant without already assuming the analogy's validity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Structural mappings can be grounded in independently verified causal mechanisms and shared physical principles.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Not all ampliative inferences lack evidential grounding; background knowledge constrains which mappings are epistemically justified.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Strong analogies systematically preserve relevant relations; this preservation is itself evidence supporting the mapping.
      ?

      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

    Analogical inference extends conclusions beyond what shared structures logically...Analogue confirmation is not vulnerable to the Dutch Book logical difficulties t...No independent evidence can justify which structural features are relevant witho...Not all ampliative inferences lack evidential grounding; background knowledge co...
    +3 moreShow less
    Strong analogies systematically preserve relevant relations; this preservation i...Structural mappings between source and target domains are stipulated by analogue...Structural mappings can be grounded in independently verified causal mechanisms ...

    Details

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