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
    Science can explain how we form beliefs without thereby s... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Epistemologists should renounce the project of explaining knowledge a priori and independently of science

    Science can explain how we form beliefs without thereby supplying the normative criteria for when those beliefs constitute knowledge.

    ?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.Descriptive science explains causal mechanisms; normativity requires independent philosophical evaluation of what makes beliefs justified.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Brain imaging showing how we form beliefs tells us nothing about whether those beliefs track truth or meet rational standards.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Is-ought gap: facts about belief formation processes cannot logically entail standards for distinguishing knowledge from mere opinion.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Evolutionary science reveals that our belief-forming mechanisms were selected for tracking truth; this naturologically grounds normative standards.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Understanding cognitive reliability conditions IS understanding when beliefs constitute knowledge; the distinction between explanation and norm collapses.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Claiming normativity exists 'outside' science suggests normative epistemology is unfalsifiable and disconnected from how minds actually work.
      ?

      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.

    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

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedSkepticism1 linked

    Related

    Brain imaging showing how we form beliefs tells us nothing about whether those b...Claiming normativity exists 'outside' science suggests normative epistemology is...Descriptive science explains causal mechanisms; normativity requires independent...Epistemologists should renounce the project of explaining knowledge a priori and...
    +3 moreShow less
    Evolutionary science reveals that our belief-forming mechanisms were selected fo...Is-ought gap: facts about belief formation processes cannot logically entail sta...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit
    Understanding cognitive reliability conditions IS understanding when beliefs con...