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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Statistical evidence alone cannot provide the knowledge necessary for a finding of liability.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Epistemic standards for legal liability should track the probability of truth, not require individualized causal narratives.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If a defendant's market share is 90%, the probability they caused harm exceeds most 'beyond reasonable doubt' thresholds.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Requiring non-statistical proof is an arbitrary epistemic preference that systematically favors defendants with obscured causal records.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Individualized causal evidence is itself probabilistic and inferential, not categorically different from statistical evidence in epistemic kind.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Hacking's frequentist and Cohen's Baconian probability frameworks both ground legitimate belief formation in population-level data without requiring singular causation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Knowledge necessary for a finding of liability cannot be obtained from statistical evidence alone.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Statistical evidence such as market share data is not causally connected with the specific fact sought to be proved.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Statistical evidence cannot guarantee the truth of the relevant belief about the defendant's specific act.
      ?

      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.
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42