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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that For an argument to be successful with a specific audience, its premises must be emotionally acceptable to that audience, not merely true.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Frege's distinction between the logical content of a proposition and its psychological presentation entails that validity is entirely independent of audience affect.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.An argument's success conditions must be separated into epistemic success (truth-preservation) and rhetorical success (persuasion), which are categorically distinct.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Conflating persuasive efficacy with argumentative soundness commits the genetic fallacy by grounding appraisal in reception rather than in propositional structure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Habermas's theory of communicative rationality holds that ideal discourse requires bracketing emotional acceptability in favor of the 'unforced force of the better argument'.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If emotional acceptability were a success condition, arguments that exploit affective bias—such as appeals to fear or tribal loyalty—would count as successful, which is normatively untenable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Arguments are often attempts to convince a specific audience of a conclusion.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Aristotle argues in the Rhetoric that successful arguments must have premises in keeping with the pathos of the audience.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The emotional character of premises must not undermine the ethos of the arguer.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42