Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Frege and early Russell held that logical relations between propositions are objective and mind-independent, not relative to individual credences.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Propositions themselves may be mind-dependent constructs; if so, their logical relations cannot be wholly objective.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Assessments of logical strength vary with background knowledge and rational frameworks, suggesting credence-relativity is unavoidable.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Early Frege-Russell logic excluded non-classical logics; modern logic shows logical relations depend on which system one adopts.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Logical entailment (e.g., 'All men are mortal' entails 'Socrates is mortal') holds regardless of what anyone believes about it.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If logical relations were mind-dependent, contradictions could be true for some agents and false for others, making discourse impossible.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Mathematical proofs remain valid centuries after discovery, suggesting logical relations exist independently of contemporary credences.
?
How convincing is this?
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.