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

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 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

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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