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 the revealed irrationality is located in the belief st... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Dutch book and representation theorem arguments provide at best a pragmatic, not epistemic, justification for obeying the probability axioms

    If the revealed irrationality is located in the belief state itself, the argument's force is epistemic, not merely pragmatic.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Epistemic critique targets truth-conduciveness; if a belief is internally incoherent, it fails rationality standards independent of consequences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Pragmatic arguments work via incentives or outcomes; epistemic ones work via logical structure. Locating irrationality in belief state itself indicates the latter.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A belief's rational status depends on its justification and coherence, not merely whether accepting it produces good results.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The distinction between epistemic and pragmatic force is artificial; all arguments affect behavior through belief-revision incentives, semantic location notwithstanding.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Identifying irrationality 'in the belief state' could merely describe where we locate the problem, not what makes the argument's force genuinely epistemic rather than pragmatic.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Even if a belief contains internal irrationality, showing why one ought to abandon it often relies on pragmatic considerations about rationality's value.
      ?

      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.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedSkepticism1 linked

    Related

    A belief's rational status depends on its justification and coherence, not merel...Dutch book and representation theorem arguments provide at best a pragmatic, not...Epistemic critique targets truth-conduciveness; if a belief is internally incohe...Even if a belief contains internal irrationality, showing why one ought to aband...
    +3 moreShow less
    Identifying irrationality 'in the belief state' could merely describe where we l...Pragmatic arguments work via incentives or outcomes; epistemic ones work via log...The distinction between epistemic and pragmatic force is artificial; all argumen...

    Details

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