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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Anyone who believes a proposition that they do not take to be more likely than not is thereby acting immorally.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.William James argued in 'The Will to Believe' that forced, live, momentous options with no available evidence may be decided by passional nature without moral fault.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.When evidence is genuinely insufficient to determine a question, suspending judgment is itself a choice with moral costs, not a morally neutral default.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, believing under evidential uncertainty can be morally permissible when the costs of non-belief outweigh the epistemic norm of proportioning belief to evidence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Clifford's evidentialism presupposes that all beliefs are subject to the same epistemic norms, but first-person practical commitments (e.g., trusting a loved one) occupy a distinct normative domain from third-person theoretical inquiry.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Moral evaluation of belief requires assessing the agent's full epistemic situation, including whether evidence-gathering was reasonably available, not merely the probability assigned to the proposition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone to believe anything upon insufficient evidence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Believing a proposition one does not take to be more likely than not constitutes believing upon insufficient evidence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.