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
    Replacing modal entailment with a priori entailment smugg... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→An a priori entailment relation must replace modal entailment in the analysis of ontological commitment.

    Replacing modal entailment with a priori entailment smuggles a rationalist epistemic constraint into what is fundamentally a naturalistic, holistic project.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.A priori entailment requires rational intuition independent of empirical evidence, incompatible with naturalism's commitment to empirical grounding.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Holistic projects like conceptual analysis succeed by integrating all available evidence; rationalist constraints artificially restrict this integration.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Modal entailment captures genuine metaphysical possibility without presupposing rational faculties naturalism cannot adequately explain.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Modal entailment itself requires non-empirical standards for determining possibility; it's equally rationalist, just less transparent about it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A priori constraints can be naturalized through cognitive science; they needn't conflict with holistic projects grounded in empirical psychology.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The distinction between 'modal' and 'a priori' entailment may be semantic rather than substantive, making the criticism parasitic on equivocation.
      ?

      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.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Modality & Possibility1 linkedPhilosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    A priori constraints can be naturalized through cognitive science; they needn't ...A priori entailment requires rational intuition independent of empirical evidenc...An a priori entailment relation must replace modal entailment in the analysis of...Holistic projects like conceptual analysis succeed by integrating all available ...
    +3 moreShow less
    Modal entailment captures genuine metaphysical possibility without presupposing ...Modal entailment itself requires non-empirical standards for determining possibi...The distinction between 'modal' and 'a priori' entailment may be semantic rather...

    Details

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