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
    Different societies may have incompatible but internally ... — Carmelics
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Different societies may have incompatible but internally coherent systems of logic

    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.Validity and rules of inference are defined by the practices of a given community
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Rules of inference are relative to community practices rather than being a priori universal restrictions on all thought
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The laws of non-contradiction and excluded middle are presupposed by any coherent system of inference, including those used to assert relativism itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A logical system that genuinely rejects non-contradiction cannot be 'internally coherent' in any meaningful sense, since coherence requires distinguishing truth from falsity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Priest's dialethism notwithstanding, no natural language community demonstrably reasons without distinguishing valid from invalid inference in practice.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Davidson's principle of charity entails that radical logical divergence between communities would make their utterances uninterpretable as assertions at all.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If we cannot recognize another community's practices as logic without shared inferential norms, then 'incompatible logics' is not a coherent cross-cultural description but a failure of translation.
      ?

      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

    Connections

    1 topic

    Philosophy of Language2 linked

    Related

    A logical system that genuinely rejects non-contradiction cannot be 'internally ...Davidson's principle of charity entails that radical logical divergence between ...If we cannot recognize another community's practices as logic without shared inf...Priest's dialethism notwithstanding, no natural language community demonstrably ...
    +3 moreShow less
    Rules of inference are relative to community practices rather than being a prior...The laws of non-contradiction and excluded middle are presupposed by any coheren...Validity and rules of inference are defined by the practices of a given communit...

    Similar

    Because so many mutually incompatible belief systems can each appear c...78%Standards of rationality in different societies do not always coincide...77%Some cultures do not subscribe to universal laws of logic such as non-...72%Dynamical theories determine their own logic of possible propositions,...72%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: relativism
    View source passageHide passage
    Peter Winch’s interpretation of the Azande material became the impetus for a new wave of arguments for relativism about logic. Barry Barnes and David Bloor, for instance, have argued that different societies may have incompatible but internally coherent systems of logic because validity and rules of inference are defined by, and hence are relative to, the practices of a given community, rather than a priori universal restrictions on all thought. According to Bloor,
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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