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 Counting overall similarities between source and target domains is not a reliable method for evaluating analogical arguments.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Overall similarity is not a reliable guide to the plausibility of an analogical argument.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Counting similarities fails to explain the plausibility of any particular analogical argument.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Hesse's (1966) distinction between positive, negative, and neutral analogies shows that raw similarity counts ignore whether shared features are causally relevant.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.An analogy between two domains sharing 100 superficial features is weaker than one sharing 3 causally essential features, making counting a systematically misleading metric.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Goodman's 'grue' paradox demonstrates that without principled predicates, any two objects share infinitely many similarities, rendering counting computationally and conceptually vacuous.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A reliable evaluative method must discriminate between projectible and non-projectible properties, a distinction that mere similarity counting cannot supply.
      ?

      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.