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

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 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 for 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

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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