Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Philosophical reflection is only non-pointless when it can in principle alter justified normative commitments, not merely rehearse foregone conclusions.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Deepening understanding of *why* commitments are justified has intrinsic value even if the commitments themselves don't change.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Some justified normative commitments may be rationally unshakeable; their resistance to revision proves their strength, not philosophy's pointlessness.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Reflection can be non-pointless by clarifying concepts, resolving internal tensions, or strengthening commitments against objections.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Reflection that merely confirms prior beliefs produces no new understanding and wastes intellectual resources better spent elsewhere.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Normative commitments should be responsive to reasons; reflection unable to modify them suggests those commitments are dogmatic, not justified.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Philosophy's distinctive value lies in challenging assumptions; purely confirmatory reflection abandons this distinctive critical function.
?
How convincing is this?
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.