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
    Benacerraf's epistemic challenge establishes that if numb... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→The sentence 'There are infinitely many prime numbers' can be literally true even though there are no such things as numbers.

    Benacerraf's epistemic challenge establishes that if numbers are causally inert abstract objects, reliable mathematical knowledge becomes inexplicable.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Reliable knowledge typically requires causal contact between knower and known object via perception or measurement.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Abstract objects cannot causally interact with physical brains or produce the sensory evidence required for knowledge.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Mathematical knowledge is reliably acquired and widely shared, yet cannot be explained if numbers lack causal powers.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Not all knowledge requires direct causal contact—we reliably know logical truths and counterfactuals without causation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Mathematical knowledge may derive from structure, syntax, or inference rules rather than causal access to abstract objects.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The challenge assumes a narrow empiricist epistemology; rationalist accounts explain math knowledge without causal contact.
      ?

      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.

    Key Terms

    knowledge(Distinguished from mere true belief, which may be the product of indoctrination and need not exercise deliberative capacities.)
    Justified true belief — true belief that has been arrived at through the exercise of deliberative capacities, including comparison of and deliberation among alternatives.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedPhilosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    Abstract objects cannot causally interact with physical brains or produce the se...Mathematical knowledge is reliably acquired and widely shared, yet cannot be exp...Mathematical knowledge may derive from structure, syntax, or inference rules rat...Not all knowledge requires direct causal contact—we reliably know logical truths...
    +3 moreShow less
    Reliable knowledge typically requires causal contact between knower and known ob...The challenge assumes a narrow empiricist epistemology; rationalist accounts exp...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit
    The sentence 'There are infinitely many prime numbers' can be literally true eve...