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 Natural kinds should be understood as kinds that support induction and explanation, where generalisations need not be exceptionless.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Natural kinds require homeostatic property clusters or essential microstructural properties, not merely inductive utility (Boyd, Ellis).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A kind defined solely by inductive success conflates epistemic convenience with ontological category membership.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Scientific generalizations about non-natural groupings (e.g., 'jade') can support induction, proving inductive utility insufficient for natural kindhood.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Allowing exception-laden generalizations to define natural kinds collapses the distinction between natural kinds and mere nominal or conventional kinds (Kripke, Putnam).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If exceptionless laws are not required, there is no principled criterion to exclude gerrymandered predicates like Goodman's 'grue' from constituting natural kinds.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Natural kinds are identified by their role in supporting induction and explanation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Generalisations in inductive and explanatory processes can have exceptions and still be scientifically valid.
      ?

      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.