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
    Moore* is not transmissive of justification from E8 to Q8* — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Moore* is not transmissive of justification from E8 to Q8*

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Transmission of justification requires that the conclusion's justification be epistemically independent of the premise's justification (Davies 2004).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.In Moore*, justification for Q8* ('I am not a handless brain in a vat') is a precondition for, not a consequence of, treating E8 as evidence about the external world.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.When a proposition functions as an enabling condition rather than an evidential consequence, inferential transmission is broken at the source.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Hinge propositions in Wittgenstein's sense (On Certainty §341) cannot receive justification through ordinary empirical inference because they constitute the framework within which such inferences operate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Q8* functions as a hinge proposition: its role is to underwrite the evidential relevance of E8, not to be confirmed by it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A proposition that must already be in place for E8 to count as evidence cannot coherently be justified by that same evidence without vicious circularity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Not-Q8* (the logical negation of Q8*) provides a potential explanation of E8 ('My experience is in all respects as of a hand held up in front of my face')
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If Moore* transmitted justification for Q8* via E8, then E8 should count as evidence for Q8*
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.One and the same proposition cannot simultaneously be evidence for a hypothesis and its logical negation
      ?

      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 proposition that must already be in place for E8 to count as evidence cannot c...E8 is evidence (at least weakly) for Not-Q8* because Not-Q8* explains E8Hinge propositions in Wittgenstein's sense (On Certainty §341) cannot receive ju...If Moore* transmitted justification for Q8* via E8, then E8 should count as evid...
    +6 moreShow less
    In Moore*, justification for Q8* ('I am not a handless brain in a vat') is a pre...Not-Q8* (the logical negation of Q8*) provides a potential explanation of E8 ('M...One and the same proposition cannot simultaneously be evidence for a hypothesis ...Q8* functions as a hinge proposition: its role is to underwrite the evidential r...Transmission of justification requires that the conclusion's justification be ep...When a proposition functions as an enabling condition rather than an evidential ...

    Similar

    Moore* and similar variants of Moore are not transmissive of justifica...93%Soccer is non-transmissive of the justification depending on E692%Moore* does not transmit propositional justification from P8 to Q8*83%Belief (B) is justified83%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: transmission-justification-warrant
    View source passageHide passage
    An important difference between Moore and Moore* is this: whereas the logical negation of Q8 does not explain the evidential statement E8 (“My experience is in all respects as of a hand held up in front of my face”) adduced in support of P8, the logical negation of Q8* — i.e., Not-Q8* — explains E8 to some extent. Accordingly, since Not-Q8* provides a potential explanation of E8, is it intuitive that E8 is evidence (perhaps very week evidence) for believing Not-Q8*. It is easy to conclude from t
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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