If even foundational framework-constituting commitments admit of rational revision through practice and experience, Carnap's internal/external distinction cannot sustain a domain of purely non-rational choice.

?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.

Carnap: Rudolf Carnap (1891-1970) was a highly influential German-American philosopher who believed that many traditional philosophical problems could be solved by carefully analyzing the language we use to talk about them. He pioneered the idea that philosophy should work closely with science and mathematics, using precise logical methods to clarify confused thinking. His work fundamentally changed how philosophers approach their discipline, making language analysis and logical rigor central to philosophical practice.
Foundational framework-constituting commitments(as used in epistemology (the study of knowledge)): The basic, core assumptions and beliefs that form the structure of how we understand the world—like the bedrock rules that everything else is built on.
Internal/external distinction(the core concept Carnap created): The idea that there's a difference between questions asked *inside* a framework (like using the rules of math within mathematics) versus questions asked *about* the framework itself (like whether math is 'really true' in the world).
Purely non-rational choice

Based on where you are in your exploration