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
    Fallibilism (Peirce, Dewey, Popper) holds that knowledge ... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→If claims (2) and (3) are true, then claim (1) is false — that is, there is no knowledge

    Fallibilism (Peirce, Dewey, Popper) holds that knowledge does not require infallibility but only justified, revisable 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.Science progresses by revising theories in light of new evidence, proving fallibility is compatible with reliable knowledge.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Demanding infallibility makes knowledge impossible; no finite being can achieve certainty about anything empirical.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Justified belief tracks truth better than infallibility does, since justification responds to available evidence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.If beliefs are revisable, they lack the stability needed to ground confident action and genuine knowledge claims.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Fallibilism conflates 'not infallible' with 'possibly false,' but knowledge might require certainty about core axioms.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Some truths (logical laws, basic observations) seem resistant to revision, suggesting fallibilism is too universal.
      ?

      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.

    Key Terms

    knowledge(Distinguished from mere true belief, which may be the product of indoctrination and need not exercise deliberative capacities.)
    Justified true belief — true belief that has been arrived at through the exercise of deliberative capacities, including comparison of and deliberation among alternatives.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedSkepticism1 linked

    Related

    Demanding infallibility makes knowledge impossible; no finite being can achieve ...Fallibilism conflates 'not infallible' with 'possibly false,' but knowledge migh...If beliefs are revisable, they lack the stability needed to ground confident act...If claims (2) and (3) are true, then claim (1) is false — that is, there is no k...
    +3 moreShow less
    Justified belief tracks truth better than infallibility does, since justificatio...Science progresses by revising theories in light of new evidence, proving fallib...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit
    Some truths (logical laws, basic observations) seem resistant to revision, sugge...