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
    If both answers are correct only relative to their own fr... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Accepting that there is no Archimedean vantage point for choosing among conflicting frameworks dissolves the apparent contradiction between the Carnapian and mereological answers.

    If both answers are correct only relative to their own frameworks, then they do not assert the same proposition and thus do not genuinely contradict each other.

    Philosophy of LanguageTruth & Knowledge
    ?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.

    Topics

    Philosophy of LanguageTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Skepticism2 linked

    Related

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Philosophy of Language
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Accepting that there is no Archimedean vantage point for choosing among conflict...Both the Carnapian and mereological answers are correct relative to their respec...There is no neutral, framework-independent standpoint from which to adjudicate b...

    Similar

    It is evident that those two statements do contradict one another80%Accepting that there is no Archimedean vantage point for choosing amon...78%Aharonov and Bohm independently arrived at the same conclusion as Weyl...78%If two propositions are identical, they have the same truth value in a...77%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: relativism
    View source passageHide passage
    The puzzle is to explain how both the Carnapian and mereological answers to the one and same question could be correct and yet mutually incompatible, for unless we abandon the most fundamental law of logic, the law of non-contradiction, we cannot deem one and the same proposition true and not true. Relativists respond that both answers are correct, each relative to the conceptual scheme it invokes. So, once we accept the insight that there is no Archimedean vantage point for choosing among confl

    Details

    Type
    premise
    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