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 Bp → BBp is not a universally valid epistemic principl... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Epistemic logic can express principles that AGM belief revision and non-monotonic logic cannot straightforwardly express

    If Bp → BBp is not a universally valid epistemic principle, then AGM's silence on it reflects a theoretical virtue rather than an expressive limitation.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Bp → BBp conflates belief with certainty and isn't universally valid across epistemic contexts or agents.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.AGM's silence on controversial principles avoids theoretical commitments that lack consensus justification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Expressing invalid principles as axioms would mislead users more than remaining neutral on unsettled issues.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Silence on Bp → BBp leaves AGM incomplete for modeling introspective agents or higher-order belief dynamics.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A framework can acknowledge a principle's non-universality while explaining why it fails, rather than omitting it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Claiming silence reflects virtue presumes AGM's scope is correctly limited—a substantive assumption needing defense.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedConsciousness & Mind1 linked

    Related

    A framework can acknowledge a principle's non-universality while explaining why ...AGM's silence on controversial principles avoids theoretical commitments that la...Bp → BBp conflates belief with certainty and isn't universally valid across epis...Claiming silence reflects virtue presumes AGM's scope is correctly limited—a sub...
    +3 moreShow less
    Epistemic logic can express principles that AGM belief revision and non-monotoni...Expressing invalid principles as axioms would mislead users more than remaining ...Silence on Bp → BBp leaves AGM incomplete for modeling introspective agents or h...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit