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
    Phillips is either asserting the surprising claim that ge... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Phillips is either asserting the surprising claim that generative theorizing has never been led astray by demonstrably unreliable data, or he is changing the subject.

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    0 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Phillips denies that unreliable data has damaged or held back generative theorizing.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The only coherent interpretations of this denial are that generative theorizing was never misled by unreliable data, or that Phillips is addressing a different question.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Related

    Phillips denies that unreliable data has damaged or held back generative theoriz...The only coherent interpretations of this denial are that generative theorizing ...

    Similar

    Phillips denies that unreliable data has damaged or held back generati...89%The only coherent interpretations of this denial are that generative t...88%A methodological concern about unreliable data cannot be dismissed mer...77%The foundational assumptions of generative linguistic theory are not s...77%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: linguistics
    View source passageHide passage
    Either Phillips is fronting the surprising opinion that generative theorizing has never been led down the wrong track by demonstrably unreliable data, or he is changing the subject. And unless clear criteria are established for what counts as “damage” and “holding back,” Phillips is not offering any testable hypothesis about data collection methodology. For example, Phillips discounts the observation of Schütze (1996) that conflicting judgments of relative unacceptability of violations of two li
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    1 (0 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit