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
    Most human errors in reasoning stem from false principles... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Most human errors in reasoning stem from false principles rather than from invalid inference

    Skepticism
    ?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.People rarely accept arguments that are defective merely because the conclusion is badly drawn
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Errors based on false principles are more common than errors of invalid inference
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Aristotle's systematic treatment of fallacies in the Sophistical Refutations catalogs numerous formal errors—equivocation, affirming the consequent—that occur independently of any false principle.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Kahneman and Tversky's heuristics-and-biases research demonstrates that subjects commit systematic logical errors even when supplied with stipulated, accepted premises in laboratory conditions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If invalid inference patterns occur predictably across domains regardless of content, then structural reasoning failures are causally independent of, and irreducible to, false principles.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The Port-Royal logicians conflate the genetic question of error's origin with the normative question of error's logical type, which are distinct inquiries.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Frege's distinction between psychologism and logical validity establishes that the frequency of a reasoning error in human practice has no bearing on whether that error is formal or material in character.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, even if false principles were the more common cause historically, this would not establish that invalid inference is a lesser or subordinate category of error in any logically significant sense.
      ?

      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

    Aristotle's systematic treatment of fallacies in the Sophistical Refutations cat...Errors based on false principles are more common than errors of invalid inferenc...Frege's distinction between psychologism and logical validity establishes that t...If invalid inference patterns occur predictably across domains regardless of con...
    +4 moreShow less
    Kahneman and Tversky's heuristics-and-biases research demonstrates that subjects...People rarely accept arguments that are defective merely because the conclusion ...The Port-Royal logicians conflate the genetic question of error's origin with th...Therefore, even if false principles were the more common cause historically, thi...

    Similar

    Errors based on false principles are more common than errors of invali...89%Sophisms arise from misapplication of legitimate inference rules, not ...81%Fundamental moral principles cannot be arrived at through reasoning, a...78%Deductive inferences are informative for humans because humans are not...78%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: port-royal-logic
    View source passageHide passage
    The majority of people’s errors, as we have already said elsewhere [i.e., on p. 9], depend more on reasoning based on false principles, than from reasoning incorrectly from their principles. We rarely allow ourselves to be misled by arguments that are defective merely because the conclusion is badly drawn. And those who could not recognize a fallacy by the light of reason alone would usually not be able to understand the rules behind it, much less to apply them. (Logic, 135; also see III.9, 157
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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