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 Aristotle's syllogistic necessity is epistemologically insufficient as a basis for scientific knowledge

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Aristotle claims that demonstrative knowledge yields necessary truth because its object cannot be other than it is
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Such necessity is merely the logical necessity of a conclusion following from its premises, not a guarantee of truth about reality
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Premises themselves may be arbitrary, so syllogistic necessity does not ensure knowledge of the world
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Skepticism
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.