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
    Any attempt to define inferential validity without appeal... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→This circularity means inferentialism cannot provide a genuine foundation for semantics—it relocates, rather than eliminates, the dependence on a prior semantic notion.

    Any attempt to define inferential validity without appealing to semantic content (like 'correctness' or 'appropriateness') presupposes the very semantic notions it claims to ground.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Key Terms

    Inferential validity(the main subject of the statement)
    When a logical argument correctly follows its rules—if the starting points are true, the conclusion must be true.
    Presupposes(as describing what Plantinga's argument takes for granted)
    Assumes something to be true without proving it—like how an argument might presuppose that logic works, without first arguing that logic is valid.
    Semantic notions(as concepts that the theory tried to explain)
    Ideas about meaning and truth—things related to what words and sentences actually mean and whether they're true or false.
    To ground (in philosophy)(what the statement discusses—grounding validity in something)
    To provide the foundation or basis for something; to explain why something is true by showing what it rests on.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Explore a random proposition
    Start fresh with something unrelated.
    semantic content(Cappelen and Lepore's literalist/minimalist framework)
    Propositions determined solely by conventions of meaning, precisification, disambiguation, and reference fixing — not by pragmatic inference.

    Connections

    1 linked claim

    This circularity means inferentialism cannot provide a genuine foundation for se...

    Related

    This circularity means inferentialism cannot provide a genuine foundation for se...

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective