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 Non-traditional modes of arguing (emotional expressions, physical demonstrations, intuitions) can be legitimate premises in arguments

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Valid premises must be truth-apt propositions capable of bearing logical relations like entailment and contradiction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Emotional expressions and physical demonstrations are not truth-apt; they neither assert nor deny propositional content.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, non-propositional acts cannot function as premises without collapsing the distinction between persuasion and proof.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Habermas's discourse ethics requires that rational consensus emerge only from the unforced force of the better argument, not affective pressure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Admitting emotional expressions as premises privileges rhetorically powerful affects over logically superior reasoning, distorting epistemic outcomes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Legitimizing non-propositional inputs as argumentative premises conflates the causal genesis of belief with its rational justification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.An argument may consist of sentences and/or expressions of emotion, physical demonstrations, and intuitions
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A forlorn look or tears provide evidence that promotes coalescence
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Whatever provides evidence that promotes coalescence functions as a premise in an argument
      ?

      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.