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 John Earman argues in 'Hume's Abject Failure' that Hume conflates epistemic conceivability with genuine metaphysical possibility without justification.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Hume explicitly distinguishes conceivability from possibility, limiting conceivability to logically coherent ideas in his framework.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Earman's critique may misread Hume's epistemic project—Hume focuses on what grounds knowledge, not metaphysical possibility itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Even if the conflation exists, it doesn't defeat Hume's core claims about the limits of empirical knowledge of causation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Hume treats whatever is conceivable as metaphysically possible without establishing why conceivability should track possibility.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.We can conceive of logically impossible scenarios (round squares), showing conceivability exceeds genuine metaphysical possibility.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Hume's argument against necessary connections relies on this conflation, undermining his empiricist conclusions about causation.
      ?

      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.