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 have no logical reason for thei... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Self-evident propositions have no logical reason for their truth — they are true by themselves alone, not inferred from any other proposition.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.A self-evident proposition is one whose truth does not derive from any other proposition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If a proposition's evidence lay in something else (e.g., our conviction of it), then that proposition would not be self-evident.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Wittgenstein's 'On Certainty' shows that basic propositions gain their status from within a holistic framework of practices, not in isolation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A proposition that requires a conceptual framework to be recognized as true is not grounded in itself alone, but in that framework.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, what appears self-evident is epistemically dependent on prior structural commitments, undermining the claim of groundless self-sufficiency.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Wilfrid Sellars's 'Myth of the Given' demonstrates that no proposition is epistemically basic absent its inferential relations to other beliefs.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If grasping a self-evident proposition requires possessing the relevant concepts, then its epistemic force derives partly from one's conceptual competence, not the proposition alone.
      ?

      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

    Connections

    1 topic

    Proof of definition segments2 linked

    Related

    A proposition that requires a conceptual framework to be recognized as true is n...A self-evident proposition is one whose truth does not derive from any other pro...If a proposition's evidence lay in something else (e.g., our conviction of it), ...If grasping a self-evident proposition requires possessing the relevant concepts...
    +3 moreShow less
    Therefore, what appears self-evident is epistemically dependent on prior structu...Wilfrid Sellars's 'Myth of the Given' demonstrates that no proposition is episte...Wittgenstein's 'On Certainty' shows that basic propositions gain their status fr...

    Similar

    Self-evident propositions have no logical reasons that prove their tru...93%Self-evident propositions do not require reasons — they appear true di...90%Self-evident propositions are not incapable of proof; their being self...89%If a proposition is self-evident, reasoning to it is neither possible ...87%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: moral-epistemology-a-priori
    View source passageHide passage
    [T]he fundamental principles of Ethics must be self-evident. But I am anxious that this expression should not be misunderstood. The expression “self-evident” means properly that the proposition so called is evident or true, by itself alone; that it is not an inference from some proposition other than itself. The expression does not mean that the proposition is true, because it is evident to you or me or all mankind, because in other words it appears to us to be true. That a proposition appears t
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit