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 Sociological consensus in mathematics has historically persisted for centuries before being overturned (e.g., Euclidean geometry's necessity).

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Euclidean geometry wasn't 'overturned'—alternative geometries coexist as equally valid systems. This differs from scientific consensus being falsified.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Mathematical consensus typically reflects logical proof, not sociological fashion. The shift to non-Euclidean geometry occurred via rigorous internal development, not social pressure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Most mathematical fundamentals (arithmetic, basic logic, calculus) have persisted unchanged for centuries because they're proven, not because consensus is fragile.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Non-Euclidean geometries emerged in 19th century after 2000+ years of consensus that Euclid's parallel postulate was necessary.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Mathematical communities have historically resisted paradigm shifts (e.g., imaginary numbers, transfinite sets) until empirical applications forced acceptance.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Current mathematical consensus on foundational issues (e.g., infinity, continuum hypothesis) remains unsettled, suggesting past certainties were premature.
      ?

      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.