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

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 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 for 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

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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