Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Indispensability is a necessary condition for Quinean confirmational holism to extend empirical support to mathematics.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Mathematical theorems remain epistemically justified through proof and internal consistency, independent of whether they're indispensable to physics.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Indispensability conflates explanatory utility with evidential support; mathematics might be pragmatically necessary without being confirmable by observation.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Alternative mathematical frameworks could prove equally indispensable to empirical theories, suggesting indispensability underdetermines which mathematics gains support.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
If mathematical statements are woven into our best empirical theories, removing them would compromise predictive success and explanatory power.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Only indispensable components of a theory acquire empirical warrant through holistic confirmation; optional additions cannot inherit observational support.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Quine's rejection of the analytic-synthetic distinction requires that mathematics share confirmation-bearing status with physics if both are theory-internal.
?
How convincing is this?
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.