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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Hawthorne and Stanley's knowledge-action principles provide independent empirical motivation for invariantism over contextualism about knowledge attributions.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Knowledge-action principles equally support contextualism: context determines both truth-conditions and appropriate action-standards simultaneously.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The distinction between 'truth-conditions' and 'action-guidance' may be theoretically artificial rather than empirically discoverable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Invariantism struggles to explain why we withdraw 'knows' attributions in high-stakes cases if truth-conditions genuinely remain constant.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Knowledge-action principles explain why high-stakes contexts raise knowledge standards without changing truth conditions of attributions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Invariantism avoids positing context-sensitivity for 'knows' while accommodating practical differences through action-guidance norms.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Experimental evidence shows subjects treat knowledge attributions as true/false independent of practical stakes, supporting invariant truth-conditions.
      ?

      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.