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 On Buridan's account, an inference valid across all models preserving the semantic content of its constituent terms qualifies as formally valid in a broader, defensible sense.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Model-preservation criteria blur the boundary between formal and material validity, risking circularity in what counts as 'preserved content'.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Modern model-theoretic semantics already captures inference validity across interpretations without invoking Buridan's broader, less precise category.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Claiming this is 'formally valid in a broader sense' conflates logical categories rather than clarifying them—broadening validity risks emptying the term.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Medieval logicians recognized that formal validity requires more than modern symbolic logic captures, including semantic stability across interpretations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Model-preservation of semantic content avoids the gap between syntactic validity and real inferential guarantees that trouble purely formal accounts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Buridan's approach preserves intuitive validity judgments while remaining rigorous—avoiding both psychologism and excessive formalism.
      ?

      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.