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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Reflective equilibrium methodology is distinct from naturalized epistemology in a significant respect

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Reflective equilibrium, as Rawls conceived it, appeals to considered judgments shaped by contingent psychological and social facts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.An methodology grounded in contingent human intuitions is itself a form of naturalism, as Stich and Weinberg argue in critiques of armchair epistemology.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, reflective equilibrium and naturalized epistemology share a common dependence on empirical facts about cognizers, undermining their alleged distinctness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Quine's naturalized epistemology retains normative aims, seeking to identify reliable belief-forming methods within a scientific framework.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If naturalized epistemology shares the normative goal of identifying good epistemic practices, the alleged distinction collapses into one of method, not aim.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Reflective equilibrium explicitly seeks to arrive at acceptable normative principles
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Naturalized epistemology does not share this explicit normative aim
      ?

      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.
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42