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 One can never be warranted in believing any particular hypothesis when multiple empirically equivalent hypotheses exist

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Non-empirical theoretical virtues like simplicity, coherence, and explanatory power constitute genuine epistemic grounds for hypothesis selection.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Inference to the best explanation is a legitimate warrant-conferring practice even when competing hypotheses are empirically equivalent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A hypothesis that maximizes theoretical virtues over rivals earns epistemic warrant that is not undermined by mere empirical equivalence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Empirical equivalence is typically established only relative to a bounded set of possible evidence, not all logically possible evidence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Quine's own holism implies that auxiliary assumptions can always be revised to break apparent empirical equivalences between rival theories.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.A number of hypotheses are empirically equivalent
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Empirical equivalence means that any evidence we might ever possess is unable to favor one hypothesis over the others
      ?

      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.