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
    Any induction establishes a conclusion that outstrips the... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→The poverty of the stimulus argument does not establish innate language-specific dispositions

    Any induction establishes a conclusion that outstrips the available data

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge
    ?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.

    Topics

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Philosophy of Language3 linked

    Related

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Skepticism
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Going beyond the available data is a general feature of induction, not specific ...If going beyond the data in language acquisition argued for innate language-spec...The poverty of the stimulus argument does not establish innate language-specific...

    Similar

    Mathematical induction does not function as an inference that derives ...81%Mathematical induction is a definition of what 'holds for all cardinal...81%Going beyond the available data is a general feature of induction, not...80%Proving the truth of a conclusion is a sufficient condition for justif...80%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: concepts
    View source passageHide passage
    Not surprisingly, many philosophers have questioned Chomsky’s position. The ensuing debate has helped to sharpen the crucial arguments and the extent to which nativist models should continue to command their central place in linguistic theory. (On the empiricist side, see Cowie 1999, Prinz 2002, and Sampson 2005; on the nativist side, see Laurence & Margolis 2001 and Pietroski & Crain 2012; see also the entry innateness and language and the entry philosophy of linguistics). For insta

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

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

    Share the first perspective