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 scientific demonstration can accommodate 'for the most part' truths about natural regularities, necessity is too strong a requirement for all demonstrative premises.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Demonstration requires premises that cannot be false; 'for the most part' truths are inherently fallible and defeasible.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Conflating successful prediction with necessary demonstration confuses practical utility with logical rigor and validity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If premises can accommodate exceptions, the conclusion remains uncertain, defeating demonstration's core purpose of certainty.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Natural science achieves predictive success explaining regularities that hold 'for the most part' without exception.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Requiring absolute necessity for all premises would exclude virtually all empirical sciences from being demonstrative.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Aristotle himself acknowledged that demonstrations in natural philosophy need not match mathematics' certainty standards.
      ?

      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.