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
    Du Bos's extension of vraisemblance to 'the marvelous' se... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→A work can be vraisemblable without being an imitation of real-world or historical events.

    Du Bos's extension of vraisemblance to 'the marvelous' severs the concept from its Aristotelian grounding in recognizable reality, rendering it explanatorily vacuous.

    ?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.Aristotelian vraisemblance requires probability grounded in observable human nature and natural laws; the marvelous violates these constraints.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Once vraisemblance permits supernatural or impossible events, it loses predictive power to distinguish plausible from arbitrary narratives.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Du Bos's extension conflates 'coherent internal logic' with 'verisimilitude,' abandoning the concept's original empirical anchoring.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The marvelous can be psychologically vraisemblable—audiences recognize believable emotional responses and character logic within impossible premises.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Aristotle himself permits thaumaston (wonder) in tragedy; Du Bos extends rather than severs this classical precedent for aesthetic plausibility.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Explanatory vacuity requires showing Du Bos's framework explains nothing; but it meaningfully distinguishes compelling from incoherent fantastical narratives.
      ?

      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.

    Connections

    1 topic

    Aesthetics1 linked

    Related

    A work can be vraisemblable without being an imitation of real-world or historic...Aristotelian vraisemblance requires probability grounded in observable human nat...Aristotle himself permits thaumaston (wonder) in tragedy; Du Bos extends rather ...Du Bos's extension conflates 'coherent internal logic' with 'verisimilitude,' ab...
    +3 moreShow less
    Explanatory vacuity requires showing Du Bos's framework explains nothing; but it...Once vraisemblance permits supernatural or impossible events, it loses predictiv...The marvelous can be psychologically vraisemblable—audiences recognize believabl...

    Details

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