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
    Self-evident propositions are not incapable of proof; the... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Moral Responsibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Self-evident propositions are not incapable of proof; their being self-evident does not rule out the possibility of justification or argument for them.

    Moral ResponsibilityTruth & 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.Kant's analytic-synthetic distinction shows that analytically true propositions can be both self-evident and formally demonstrable via conceptual analysis.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Frege's logicist program demonstrated that arithmetic truths, treated as self-evident by many, admit of rigorous proof without losing their foundational epistemic status.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A proposition's epistemic accessibility without inference is a feature of how it is known, not a constraint on what formal relations it may stand in.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Coherentist justification, as developed by BonJour, holds that even foundational beliefs gain epistemic support through their integration into a mutually reinforcing belief system.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Ross's prima facie duties are self-evident in the sense of Aristotle's nous: grasped immediately by trained moral perception, yet still illuminated by dialectical argument in the Nicomachean Ethics.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The self-evidence of a proposition marks the terminus of a particular epistemic route, not the exhaustion of all possible justificatory routes to that proposition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.A self-evident proposition is one that we can be justified in believing without an argument.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The absence of a need for argument does not entail the impossibility of argument.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Ross explicitly states that 'the fact that something can be inferred does not prove that it cannot be seen intuitively' (1927, 121).
      ?

      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

    Moral ResponsibilityTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    2 topics

    Modality & Possibility1 linkedSkepticism1 linked

    Related

    A proposition's epistemic accessibility without inference is a feature of how it...A self-evident proposition is one that we can be justified in believing without ...Coherentist justification, as developed by BonJour, holds that even foundational...Frege's logicist program demonstrated that arithmetic truths, treated as self-ev...
    +6 moreShow less
    If a proposition can be both inferred from other propositions and self-evident, ...Kant's analytic-synthetic distinction shows that analytically true propositions ...Ross explicitly states that 'the fact that something can be inferred does not pr...

    Similar

    If a proposition is self-evident, reasoning to it is neither possible ...93%Self-evident propositions have no logical reasons that prove their tru...91%A self-evident proposition is one that we can be justified in believin...91%If a proposition can be both inferred from other propositions and self...91%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: intuitionism-ethics
    View source passageHide passage
    Price claims that self-evident truths are “incapable of proof” (1758/1969, 160).[4] Most classical intuitionists endorse this view, although Ross is arguably an exception. This is easily missed, for he states at one point that self-evident moral propositions “cannot be proved, but … just as certainly need no proof” (1930/2002, 30). But elsewhere in The Right and the Good he makes only the more restricted claim that such propositions do not need any proof,[5] and despite the fact that he
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

    Ross's prima facie duties are self-evident in the sense of Aristotle's nous: gra...
    The absence of a need for argument does not entail the impossibility of argument...
    The self-evidence of a proposition marks the terminus of a particular epistemic ...
    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit