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

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 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 for 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

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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