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
    Recognizing textual entailment requires judgments that ac... — Carmelics
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Recognizing textual entailment requires judgments that accord with human intuitions about natural inference

    Consciousness & MindPhilosophy of Language
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Textual entailment involves determining whether one linguistic string entails a second
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Human intuitions about inference rely on word meanings, general world knowledge, and specific facts
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Human intuitions about natural inference are systematically inconsistent across individuals, cultures, and contexts (Norenzayan & Heine 2005).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A standard that varies with the measurer cannot serve as a stable criterion for evaluating computational recognition of entailment.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Formal logical entailment is defined truth-conditionally, independent of any psychological facts about human cognizers (Frege, Begriffsschrift).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Grounding textual entailment in human intuition conflates the normative logical relation with descriptive cognitive performance, a category error Frege explicitly warned against as psychologism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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

    Topics

    Philosophy of LanguageConsciousness & Mind

    Connections

    1 topic

    Truth & Knowledge1 linked

    Related

    A standard that varies with the measurer cannot serve as a stable criterion for ...Formal logical entailment is defined truth-conditionally, independent of any psy...Grounding textual entailment in human intuition conflates the normative logical ...Human intuitions about inference rely on word meanings, general world knowledge,...
    +2 moreShow less
    Human intuitions about natural inference are systematically inconsistent across ...Textual entailment involves determining whether one linguistic string entails a ...

    Similar

    Research in textual entailment treats sentences as structured syntacti...82%Performance on textual entailment tasks improves when reasoning based ...80%Bolzano's semantic notion of entailment requires that from the smalles...79%Degrees of entailment can be construed in terms of entailment probabil...78%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: computational-linguistics
    View source passageHide passage
    But how does this bear on meaning representation of natural language sentences and texts? In essence, the representation of sentences in statistical semantics consists of the sentences themselves. The idea that sentences can be used directly, in conjunction with distributional knowledge, as objects enabling inference is a rather recent and surprising one, though it was foreshadowed by many years of work on question answering based on large text corpora. The idea has gained traction as a result
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit