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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that If grasping a rule already requires a disposition to apply it (as Kripkenstein's communitarian reading suggests), then Carroll's Tortoise is not distinguishing epistemic types but exhibiting a defect in rule-comprehension itself.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Dispositions can be triggered incorrectly or misaligned with rule content. Having a disposition to do X doesn't guarantee grasping what X-following requires.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Kripkenstein's communitarian view still faces the problem: how do dispositions of a community constitute rule-correctness rather than just shared behavior?
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The Tortoise distinguishes reasoning from practice—a real distinction. Conflating them as a 'comprehension defect' dissolves rather than solves the problem.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Rule-following requires practical know-how, not just explicit knowledge. The Tortoise assumes rules can be grasped through logical propositions alone.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Carroll's infinite regress arises precisely because he treats rule-application as needing justification. But dispositions don't need justification—they just operate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If someone truly grasps a rule yet lacks the disposition to apply it, we'd say they don't actually understand it. This shows comprehension and disposition are inseparable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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