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
    Scholastic appeals to external authority cannot yield gen... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Scholastic appeals to external authority cannot yield genuine knowledge.

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    2 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Authority-based testimony transmits belief, not the cognitive contact with things themselves that Aristotle's Posterior Analytics requires for episteme.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Sanches's 'quod nihil scitur' demonstrates that genuine knowledge requires direct, unmediated acquaintance with particulars, which deference to Aristotle structurally precludes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.When the grounds for a claim are the prestige of the claimant rather than causal or evidential connection to the fact, the justificatory chain is severed at its epistemic root.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Wittgenstein's analysis in 'On Certainty' shows that inherited propositions function as hinges, not knowledge-claims, revealing that scholastic authority operates outside the space of genuine justification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A belief formed through deference to Aristotelian texts cannot survive Agrippa's trilemma: it either regresses infinitely, circles back through the same authorities, or bottoms out in unjustified assertion.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Scholastic knowledge was derived from syllogistic and demonstrative logic.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Syllogistic and demonstrative logic depended on the circularity of its own definitions and premises (verba) to arrive at conclusions about external things (rerum).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.This circular verbal reasoning created confusion out of what was otherwise clear.
      ?

      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.

    Topics

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge

    Key Terms

    knowledge(Distinguished from mere true belief, which may be the product of indoctrination and need not exercise deliberative capacities.)
    Justified true belief — true belief that has been arrived at through the exercise of deliberative capacities, including comparison of and deliberation among alternatives.

    Connections

    1 topic

    Philosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    A belief formed through deference to Aristotelian texts cannot survive Agrippa's...Authority-based testimony transmits belief, not the cognitive contact with thing...Sanches's 'quod nihil scitur' demonstrates that genuine knowledge requires direc...Scholastic knowledge was derived from syllogistic and demonstrative logic.
    +4 moreShow less
    Syllogistic and demonstrative logic depended on the circularity of its own defin...This circular verbal reasoning created confusion out of what was otherwise clear...

    Similar

    A convincing argument from authority requires that the cited authority...74%Apodictic certainty about external things is unavailable except throug...74%An appeal-to-expertise argument is weak when either the expertise of E...74%Sanches doubts the possibility of perfect knowledge of external things...73%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: francisco-sanches
    View source passageHide passage
    This letter of August, 1641, can be found in Correspondance du P. Marin Mersenne, religieux minime. X, Du 6 août 1640 à fin décembre 1641 (1967: 730) wherein the author praises Sanches’ ingenious exaggerations concerning the possibility of acquiring perfect knowledge, and criticizes Cartesianism for not being able to advance (“non progreditur”) beyond its “hyperbolical doubt” (1967: 730) . But again, the letter is too late to serve as proof of Descartes’ knowledge of Sanches’ treatise prior to t
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    When the grounds for a claim are the prestige of the claimant rather than causal...
    Wittgenstein's analysis in 'On Certainty' shows that inherited propositions func...
    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit