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
    FBP's claim that all logically consistent mathematical st... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→FBP-ists do not need to explain how humans could know that Full-Blooded Platonism is true in order to respond to the epistemic argument against platonism

    FBP's claim that all logically consistent mathematical structures exist does not automatically confer warrant on any particular human belief about which structures those are.

    ?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.Existence of all consistent structures doesn't determine which humans can reliably identify them, given cognitive and epistemic limitations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Warrant requires justified true belief; FBP only guarantees ontological status, not epistemic justification for human mathematical claims.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Multiple consistent mathematical structures may be equally coherent, so existence doesn't disambiguate which one our theories correctly describe.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.If mathematical structures exist timelessly and mind-independently, our successful predictions about them suggest reliable epistemic access to them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.FBP grants that logical consistency is the only criterion for mathematical existence, making it circular to then doubt our warrant for consistent beliefs.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The explanatory power of specific mathematical structures in science provides independent warrant beyond FBP's ontological claims alone.
      ?

      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

    Existence of all consistent structures doesn't determine which humans can reliab...FBP grants that logical consistency is the only criterion for mathematical exist...FBP-ists do not need to explain how humans could know that Full-Blooded Platonis...If mathematical structures exist timelessly and mind-independently, our successf...
    +3 moreShow less
    Multiple consistent mathematical structures may be equally coherent, so existenc...The explanatory power of specific mathematical structures in science provides in...Warrant requires justified true belief; FBP only guarantees ontological status, ...

    Details

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