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
    Evidential relations require the relata to be assessable ... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Experiences with any kind of content (including nonconceptual) can stand in evidential relations to beliefs.

    Evidential relations require the relata to be assessable as correct or incorrect by the same cognitive subject bearing the belief.

    ?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.Evidence must be intelligible to the believer; if they cannot assess correctness, the relation isn't genuinely evidential for them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Justification requires the subject to grasp why a belief is warranted, which demands their cognitive capacity to evaluate truth-conditions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Third-person evidence inaccessible to the subject cannot rationally guide their belief-formation, so it fails as evidence for them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Evidence can justify belief even if the subject cannot personally assess correctness—e.g., trusting expert testimony on quantum mechanics.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The claim conflates epistemic justification with subjective comprehension; unconscious processing provides evidence the subject cannot assess.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Mathematical truths are objectively correct/incorrect independent of any subject's cognitive capacity to evaluate them, yet serve as 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 topic

    Perception1 linked

    Related

    Evidence can justify belief even if the subject cannot personally assess correct...Evidence must be intelligible to the believer; if they cannot assess correctness...Experiences with any kind of content (including nonconceptual) can stand in evid...Justification requires the subject to grasp why a belief is warranted, which dem...
    +3 moreShow less
    Mathematical truths are objectively correct/incorrect independent of any subject...The claim conflates epistemic justification with subjective comprehension; uncon...Third-person evidence inaccessible to the subject cannot rationally guide their ...

    Details

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