Skip to content

Topics Thinkers Changes ContributorsLoading 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

Made within

DC&

Austin

Anything properly derived from first principles by syllog... — Carmelics

Statements: 321,452
Perspectives: 108,905
Topics: 42

Home/Truth & Knowledge

History Edit See Inverse

Anything properly derived from first principles by syllogistic inference is known with certainty

Truth & Knowledge

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

1 reason for

2 reasons against

Reasons For

1 perspective

Reason for

?

1.Knowledge of first principles is certain
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.The validity of proper syllogistic inference can be known in the same self-evident way as first principles
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

Reasons Against

2 perspectives

Reason against 1 of 2

?

1.First principles themselves are not self-evidently certain but are psychological compulsions mistaken for logical necessity, as Hume argued in the Enquiry.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.If the certainty of first principles is merely psychological, syllogistic conclusions derived from them inherit only psychological compulsion, not epistemic certainty.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

Reason against 2 of 2

?

1.Syllogistic validity preserves truth only if the inference rules themselves are truth-preserving, which cannot be established without circularity (Carroll's 'What the Tortoise Said to Achilles').
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.Scotus's claim that syllogistic validity is known in the same self-evident way as first principles does not dissolve the regress but merely asserts it stops at two distinct points without principled justification.
?
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.

Topics

Truth & Knowledge

Related

First principles themselves are not self-evidently certain but are psychological...If the certainty of first principles is merely psychological, syllogistic conclu...Knowledge of first principles is certain Scotus's claim that syllogistic validity is known in the same self-evident way a...

+2 moreShow less

Syllogistic validity preserves truth only if the inference rules themselves are ...The validity of proper syllogistic inference can be known in the same self-evide...

Similar

The validity of proper syllogistic inference can be known in the same ...90%Knowledge of first principles is certain79%Many of our own acts are known with certainty equal to first principle...77%Scholastic knowledge was derived from syllogistic and demonstrative lo...75%

Source

AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid

SEP: duns-scotus

View source passageHide passage

So Henry’s arguments, far from showing that certainty is possible through divine illumination, actually lead to a pervasive skepticism. Scotus counters that we can show that skepticism is false. We can in fact attain certainty, and we can do so by the unaided exercise of our natural intellectual powers. There are four types of knowledge in which infallible certainty is possible. First, knowledge of first principles is certain because the intellect has only to form such judgments to see that they

Extraction notes

Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

Details

Type: claim
Perspectives: 3 (1 for, 2 against)
Edits: 1 edit