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

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 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 for 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

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.