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
    Independence should be rejected — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Independence should be rejected

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    0 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.In cases where both peers have misjudged first-order evidence, the disputed first-order evidence exerts an upward epistemic push that mitigates the impact of higher-order evidence
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If first-order evidence can override the influence of higher-order evidence, then Independence — which forbids first-order evidence from influencing the weight given to higher-order evidence — is false
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge

    Related

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.
    If first-order evidence can override the influence of higher-order evidence, the...
    In cases where both peers have misjudged first-order evidence, the disputed firs...

    Similar

    Fallibilism should be rejected because there are no good reasons to ac...89%Incomparability of value should be rejected88%Arguments for propositions should be rejected85%Pitowsky's argument should be rejected84%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: disagreement
    View source passageHide passage
    While the Equal Weight View seems to be committed to the peers being justified in adopting the 0.8 degree of belief in \(H\), Kelly finds such a consequence implausible. After all, both peers badly misjudged the first-order evidence! This argument can be seen as an argument against Independence. In these cases, the disputed first-order evidence can exert an ‘upwards epistemic push” to mitigate the impact of the higher-order evidence. Kelly takes Independence on directly with the following case:
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    1 (0 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit