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 Naturalized epistemology begs the question against the global skeptic

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Naturalized epistemology operates within science
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Operating within science assumes that we already have some knowledge
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Assuming we already have some knowledge begs the question against the global skeptic, who denies that we have any knowledge
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Quine's naturalized epistemology explicitly abandons the project of first philosophy, accepting that epistemology must start from within our going theory of the world.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Any framework for evaluating knowledge claims must presuppose some epistemic standards, making a fully neutral starting point logically impossible for any epistemological program.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The global skeptic equally begs the question by presupposing the legitimacy of Cartesian standards of certainty that themselves require prior epistemic commitments to logical inference and conceptual clarity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Barry Stroud argues that naturalized epistemology dissolves rather than answers skepticism, changing the subject rather than engaging the traditional challenge on its own terms.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A research program that redefines success conditions to exclude the very problem it faces commits the fallacy of definitional retreat, which is a structural form of question-begging identified by Hamblin in formal dialectic.
      ?

      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.