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 Most's eight features of Platonic myth were derived from clearly fictional dialogues like the Phaedrus and Republic, making their application to forensic speech a category error.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Fictional framing doesn't prevent dialogues from encoding genuine insights about persuasion applicable across contexts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Most likely argues mythic features reveal *underlying structures* of rhetoric rather than literal courtroom practices, avoiding category error.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Ancient rhetorical theory regularly drew principles from philosophical sources; the distinction between philosophical and forensic is less absolute.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Phaedrus and Republic are explicitly framed as imaginative constructs, not historical accounts of actual rhetoric practices.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Mythic narratives in these dialogues serve philosophical idealization rather than describing how forensic speakers actually operated.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Applying features designed for transcendent philosophical truth-seeking to practical courtroom persuasion confuses distinct domains.
      ?

      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.