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
    If at least one competing analysis successfully anchors c... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Conceptual analysis alone cannot decide between competing analyses of disease because contending parties will be led by differing intuitions to accept different stipulations as reasonable.

    If at least one competing analysis successfully anchors contested cases to empirical biological norms rather than rival intuitions, then intuition-divergence does not preclude rational adjudication.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Key Terms

    Preclude(as used in logic and argumentation)
    To prevent something from happening or to rule something out.
    Rational adjudication(the ability to evaluate competing paradigms fairly)
    The process of judging which idea or framework is better using logic and reason.
    anchors(in epistemology (the study of how we know things))
    Connects or ties something abstract to something concrete and real that we can observe or measure.
    competing analysis(in philosophy of language and conceptual analysis)
    Different theories or explanations that try to answer the same question and contradict each other.
    contested cases(in philosophical debate)

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Explore a random proposition
    Start fresh with something unrelated.
    Examples or situations where people disagree about what the right answer is or how to classify something.
    empirical biological norms(in philosophy of science)
    Standards or patterns based on actual observations of how living things work in nature, rather than just what we think or feel.
    intuition-divergence(in philosophical methodology)
    The situation when people have conflicting gut feelings about the same question—they intuitively disagree.
    intuitions(Chudnoff's account of intuitions as the basis of a priori justification)
    Intellectual perceptions that sometimes reveal abstract reality, possessing a presentational phenomenology that can be evoked through imagination, reflection, or reasoning

    Connections

    2 topics

    Philosophy of Language1 linkedBioethics1 linked

    Related

    Conceptual analysis alone cannot decide between competing analyses of disease be...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective