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 supporting argument's denial of discursive knowled... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→God does not arrive at knowledge by deducing conclusions from premises.

    If the supporting argument's denial of discursive knowledge is stipulative rather than substantive, it resolves the problem by definition, not by genuine explanation.

    ?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.Stipulative definitions merely relabel problems without addressing underlying conceptual confusions that motivate the original question.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Genuine explanation requires showing why a phenomenon occurs, not just redefining terms to make the problem disappear linguistically.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If denying discursive knowledge solves the problem only by definition, it fails to engage the substantive epistemological commitments at stake.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Clarifying conceptual boundaries through precise definitions is often substantive philosophical work, not mere verbal stipulation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Distinguishing discursive from non-discursive knowledge may reveal that the original problem rested on conflating distinct epistemic categories.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The dichotomy between 'definitional' and 'genuine explanation' is false—definitional clarity can constitute legitimate philosophical progress.
      ?

      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.

    Key Terms

    knowledge(Distinguished from mere true belief, which may be the product of indoctrination and need not exercise deliberative capacities.)
    Justified true belief — true belief that has been arrived at through the exercise of deliberative capacities, including comparison of and deliberation among alternatives.

    Connections

    1 topic

    Divine Attributes1 linked

    Related

    Clarifying conceptual boundaries through precise definitions is often substantiv...Distinguishing discursive from non-discursive knowledge may reveal that the orig...Genuine explanation requires showing why a phenomenon occurs, not just redefinin...God does not arrive at knowledge by deducing conclusions from premises.
    +3 moreShow less
    If denying discursive knowledge solves the problem only by definition, it fails ...Stipulative definitions merely relabel problems without addressing underlying co...The dichotomy between 'definitional' and 'genuine explanation' is false—definiti...

    Details

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