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 minimal rationality permits arbitrary selection among valid inferences, agents could systematically ignore inconvenient entailments and still count as rational.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Systematic avoidance of inconvenient entailments is motivated reasoning, which undermines the evidential basis of beliefs themselves.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Rationality requires responsiveness to reasons; arbitrarily ignoring valid inferences means treating some reasons as irrelevant without justification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Distinguishing 'minimal rationality' from self-deception requires that agents *could* recognize entailments if motivated—systematic avoidance violates this.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Rationality requires consistency, but consistency only constrains actual beliefs held, not all logically derivable consequences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Cognitive limitations make processing every entailment impossible; selective inference reflects realistic rationality constraints.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If rationality demanded acknowledging all entailments, agents with finite minds couldn't be rational—an implausibly high standard.
      ?

      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.