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
    Modest transcendental arguments can be useful against cer... — Carmelics
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Modest transcendental arguments can be useful against certain forms of skepticism, once we distinguish between kinds of skepticism and target the appropriate one.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Different forms of skepticism make different demands (certainty vs. fallible justification).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A modest transcendental argument need not defeat the most demanding skeptic to be useful.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If the target skeptic only demands fallible justification and claims our beliefs are not supported by accepted cognitive norms, a modest transcendental argument can address that claim.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Stroud's objection shows transcendental arguments at best establish mind-dependence of concepts, not mind-independent facts skeptics doubt.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A modest transcendental argument that avoids strong metaphysical conclusions thereby loses the resources needed to close the skeptical gap.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Distinguishing skeptical targets without verificationist bridge principles merely relocates, rather than defeats, the original epistemic problem.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Quine's naturalized epistemology shows that skepticism amenable to fallibilist rebuttal is better addressed by empirical science than by transcendental reasoning.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the targeted skeptic only demands fallible justification, ordinary reliabilist or coherentist responses already suffice without transcendental apparatus.
      ?

      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.

    Topics

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge

    Related

    A modest transcendental argument need not defeat the most demanding skeptic to b...A modest transcendental argument that avoids strong metaphysical conclusions the...Different forms of skepticism make different demands (certainty vs. fallible jus...Distinguishing skeptical targets without verificationist bridge principles merel...
    +4 moreShow less
    If the target skeptic only demands fallible justification and claims our beliefs...If the targeted skeptic only demands fallible justification, ordinary reliabilis...Quine's naturalized epistemology shows that skepticism amenable to fallibilist r...Stroud's objection shows transcendental arguments at best establish mind-depende...

    Similar

    Different transcendental arguments can be constructed for different sk...93%If transcendental arguments successfully respond to those skeptical do...90%Strawson's transcendental argument is effective not by refuting skepti...90%A modest transcendental argument suffices to defeat skepticism: it is ...90%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: transcendental-arguments
    View source passageHide passage
    Finally, in Stern 2000, it is argued that modest transcendental arguments can be shown to be useful against skepticism, once we distinguish sufficiently carefully between the kinds of skepticism there are, and go for the right target or targets—where a less demanding form of skepticism may perhaps be defeated by a less ambitious transcendental claim. So, for example, if we take the target to be a skeptic who demands certainty, then a modest transcendental argument will not suffice. But if we tak
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit