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 Protagoras genuinely believes in relativism, arguing f... — Carmelics
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    If Protagoras genuinely believes in relativism, arguing for relativism is incoherent

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Protagoras's own reported self-refutation argument (Plato's Theaetetus 171a) shows relativism entails the truth of its own falsity for non-believers.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A position that entails its own falsity from within its own framework cannot be coherently asserted as true even by its proponent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Genuine belief in relativism therefore commits Protagoras to simultaneously holding that relativism is false for those who find it unpersuasive, undermining his act of arguing.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Performative contradiction, as analyzed by Habermas in 'The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity', occurs when an utterance's content contradicts the pragmatic presuppositions of making that utterance.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Arguing for relativism pragmatically presupposes a framework-transcendent norm of rational persuasion that relativism's content explicitly denies.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Protagoras's advocacy thus instantiates the performative self-refutation Burnyeat identifies as fatal to the homo-mensura doctrine.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Arguing for a position presupposes that the position has cross-framework persuasive force
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Relativism denies that any position has cross-framework persuasive force
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore arguing for relativism is self-undermining
      ?

      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.

    Topics

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Philosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    A position that entails its own falsity from within its own framework cannot be ...Arguing for a position presupposes that the position has cross-framework persuas...Arguing for relativism pragmatically presupposes a framework-transcendent norm o...Genuine belief in relativism therefore commits Protagoras to simultaneously hold...
    +5 moreShow less
    Performative contradiction, as analyzed by Habermas in 'The Philosophical Discou...Protagoras's advocacy thus instantiates the performative self-refutation Burnyea...Protagoras's own reported self-refutation argument (Plato's Theaetetus 171a) sho...Relativism denies that any position has cross-framework persuasive forceTherefore arguing for relativism is self-undermining

    Similar

    Accepting that relativism is only relatively true undermines the relat...88%Epistemic relativism cannot be coherently formulated.85%Automatic belief-truth relativism — where a person's beliefs are autom...84%Protagorean relativism, which holds that things are as they appear to ...84%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: relativism
    View source passageHide passage
    Plato’s argument, as it stands, appears to be damaging only if we assume that Protagoras, at least implicitly, is committed to the universal or objective truth of relativism. On this view, Plato begs the question on behalf of an absolutist conception of truth (Burnyeat 1976a: 44). Protagoras, the relativists counter, could indeed accept that his own doctrine is false for those who accept absolutism but continue believing that his doctrine is true for him. He could also try to persuade others to
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit