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 c(h,e)—the degree of confirmation of hypothesis h give... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→The first horn of Hume's dilemma does not definitively preclude an a priori argument for inductive inference

    If c(h,e)—the degree of confirmation of hypothesis h given evidence e—is a logical relation, it holds necessarily and is knowable without further empirical input.

    ?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.Logical relations like entailment hold necessarily between propositions independent of physical facts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If confirmation is logical, it depends only on the syntactic and semantic structure of h and e.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Mathematical truths about probability are knowable a priori; confirmation ratios reduce to such truths.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Confirmation requires assessing which evidence is *relevant*, but relevance depends on causal structure—an empirical matter.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Prior probabilities are needed to calculate confirmation, yet these encode contingent facts about the world or background knowledge.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Actual scientific confirmation judgments vary across contexts and depend on empirical assumptions we discover through practice.
      ?

      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 linkedSkepticism1 linked

    Related

    Actual scientific confirmation judgments vary across contexts and depend on empi...Confirmation requires assessing which evidence is *relevant*, but relevance depe...If confirmation is logical, it depends only on the syntactic and semantic struct...Logical relations like entailment hold necessarily between propositions independ...
    +3 moreShow less
    Mathematical truths about probability are knowable a priori; confirmation ratios...Prior probabilities are needed to calculate confirmation, yet these encode conti...The first horn of Hume's dilemma does not definitively preclude an a priori argu...

    Details

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