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 Psillos's additional condition for valid rule-circular arguments is not clearly justified.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Psillos requires that one should not have reason to doubt the reliability of the rule for a rule-circular argument to be valid.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.No clear answer has been given to why this additional condition should be accepted.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Epistemic circularity debates (Van Cleve, Cohen) show that rule-circular arguments can confer justification without any prohibition on antecedent doubt.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If Psillos's 'no reason to doubt' condition is added without derivation from independent epistemological principles, it constitutes an ad hoc constraint.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Ad hoc constraints introduced solely to block counterexamples undermine the theoretical integrity of the account they are meant to support.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Alston's work on epistemic circularity demonstrates that the normative force of a rule-circular argument cannot depend on the reasoner's psychological state of doubt.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Psillos's condition conflates a psychological, first-person criterion with what should be a third-person, structural criterion for argument validity.
      ?

      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.