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
    Even if consensus existed, widespread rational agreement ... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→God is eternal.

    Even if consensus existed, widespread rational agreement has historically endorsed claims later shown to be false (e.g., geocentrism).

    ?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.Rational agents with available evidence have endorsed false theories (geocentrism, phlogiston, steady-state cosmology).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Consensus reflects the limits of current evidence and methods, not truth itself—both can shift while agreement existed.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Historical false consensuses show that widespread rational agreement provides no guarantee against future falsification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Past scientific consensuses were overturned by *better evidence and reasoning*, not despite rationality—rationality self-corrected.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Geocentrism wasn't rationally endorsed by modern standards; available observations were interpreted through limited frameworks.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The claim conflates 'consensus was wrong' with 'consensus is unreliable'—but science's track record improved *because* it respects evidence.
      ?

      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 linked claim · 1 topic

    Afterlife & Death1 linked
    God is eternal.

    Related

    Consensus reflects the limits of current evidence and methods, not truth itself—...Geocentrism wasn't rationally endorsed by modern standards; available observatio...God is eternal.Historical false consensuses show that widespread rational agreement provides no...
    +3 moreShow less
    Past scientific consensuses were overturned by *better evidence and reasoning*, ...Rational agents with available evidence have endorsed false theories (geocentris...The claim conflates 'consensus was wrong' with 'consensus is unreliable'—but sci...

    Details

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