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 Relevance is not a binary property but a scalar one, making the boundary between 'no support' and 'insufficient support' indeterminate.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.For reasoning to be actionable, we must eventually decide: support or don't support. Scalar properties require binary decisions at some point.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Indeterminacy between categories is a problem to solve via better analysis, not evidence that the categories themselves lack boundaries.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Cognitive frameworks naturally partition evidence into discrete evaluative categories; scalar properties describe magnitude within categories, not between them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Relevance in real discourse varies continuously: evidence can be somewhat helpful, quite helpful, or extremely helpful without discrete thresholds.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Legal and scientific standards already treat sufficiency as gradated (preponderance vs. beyond reasonable doubt), reflecting scalar relevance.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Claiming binary boundaries requires stipulating arbitrary cutoffs where none exist naturally in degree-based reasoning.
      ?

      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.