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
    Different arguers may legitimately disagree on the streng... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Different arguers may legitimately disagree on the strength of the same argument

    Skepticism
    ?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.Arguers can differ in their assignments of initial probabilities
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Argument strength is a function of those initial probability assignments
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Bayesian personalism conflates the psychology of belief with the normative question of what credences a rational agent ought to assign.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Ramsey and de Finetti's subjectivism was itself constrained by coherence norms that rule out many divergent probability assignments as irrational.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A disagreement grounded in incoherent or poorly calibrated priors is not a legitimate disagreement but an error to be corrected.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Frege and early Russell held that logical relations between propositions are objective and mind-independent, not relative to individual credences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If argument strength tracks objective entailment relations, divergence in assessment reflects epistemic failure, not legitimate disagreement.
      ?

      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

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge

    Related

    A disagreement grounded in incoherent or poorly calibrated priors is not a legit...Arguers can differ in their assignments of initial probabilitiesArgument strength is a function of those initial probability assignmentsBayesian personalism conflates the psychology of belief with the normative quest...
    +3 moreShow less
    Frege and early Russell held that logical relations between propositions are obj...If argument strength tracks objective entailment relations, divergence in assess...Ramsey and de Finetti's subjectivism was itself constrained by coherence norms t...

    Similar

    Such arguments can promote agreement or stall disagreement even if the...80%Transcendental arguments do not fully answer skeptical doubts, even if...78%Not all arguments aim to resolve disagreement.78%Fallacies are arguments that score poorly on the measure of argument s...78%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: fallacies
    View source passageHide passage
    Since the variance in input probabilities will result in a range of outputs in argument strength, this probabilistic approach has the potential to assign argument strengths anywhere between 0 and 1, thereby allowing that different tokens of one argument type can vary greatly in strength, i.e., some will be fallacies and others not. Also, and this seems to concur with our experience, different arguers may disagree on the strength of the same arguments since they can differ in the assignments of t
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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