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
    Epistemic rationality and practical rationality are not c... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Dutch book and representation theorem arguments provide at best a pragmatic, not epistemic, justification for obeying the probability axioms

    Epistemic rationality and practical rationality are not cleanly separable when beliefs are the very inputs that determine action outcomes.

    ?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.Beliefs causally determine which actions agents perform, so evaluating belief quality requires assessing downstream practical consequences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.An epistemically justified false belief can produce worse outcomes than an unjustified true belief, making pure epistemic standards incomplete.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Rational agents must consider action-relevant stakes when deciding how much evidence to require before belief formation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Truth-conduciveness of beliefs is conceptually distinct from usefulness of beliefs; conflating them commits a pragmatist equivocation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Practical rationality concerns means-end coherence; epistemic rationality concerns evidence-belief fit. These address different standards entirely.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Bad outcomes from good epistemic reasoning occur regularly and don't undermine the rationality of the reasoning process itself.
      ?

      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

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedSkepticism1 linked

    Related

    An epistemically justified false belief can produce worse outcomes than an unjus...Bad outcomes from good epistemic reasoning occur regularly and don't undermine t...Beliefs causally determine which actions agents perform, so evaluating belief qu...Dutch book and representation theorem arguments provide at best a pragmatic, not...
    +3 moreShow less
    Practical rationality concerns means-end coherence; epistemic rationality concer...Rational agents must consider action-relevant stakes when deciding how much evid...Truth-conduciveness of beliefs is conceptually distinct from usefulness of belie...

    Details

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