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 Kant's analytic-synthetic distinction shows that analytically true propositions can be both self-evident and formally demonstrable via conceptual analysis.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The 'containment' criterion for analyticity is obscure—it's unclear what conceptual containment means or how to identify it objectively.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Quine's holism challenges whether any propositions are purely analytic, suggesting all beliefs face potential revision together.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Self-evidence and formal demonstrability are distinct properties; conflating them obscures whether analyticity guarantees both.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Analytic truths like 'bachelors are unmarried' are self-evident because the predicate is contained in the subject's concept.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Conceptual analysis can rigorously demonstrate analytic propositions by unpacking logical relationships inherent in definitions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Kant's distinction preserves necessity and apriority for analytic truths, explaining why they require no empirical confirmation.
      ?

      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.