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 Past success of Pythagorean analogies in physics provides reason to continue using them

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Inductive inference from past success to future reliability commits the problem Hume identified: no non-circular justification exists for inductive reasoning itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Pythagorean analogies have also generated physically fruitless dead-ends (e.g., Kepler's Mysterium Cosmographicum), so the historical record is mixed, not uniformly confirmatory.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Laudan's pessimistic meta-induction shows that historically successful scientific strategies are routinely abandoned as frameworks change, undermining confidence in their continuation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The success of Pythagorean analogies may reflect contingent features of classical physics rather than a stable method transferable across paradigm shifts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Similar strategies have worked well in the past
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Past success of a reasoning strategy is reason enough to continue pursuing it
      ?

      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.