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 The barebones theory of rationality (completeness + transitivity + best-choice selection) is too weak as a theory of rationality.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The barebones theory says nothing about belief.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The barebones theory says nothing about what rationality requires when agents face uncertainty.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Transitivity violations under cyclic preferences (Sen's 'menu-dependence') are rational responses to social context, not failures to be ruled out.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A theory permitting all transitive, complete preference orderings cannot distinguish rational agents from agents with patently absurd but consistent rankings.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Rationality requires more than formal coherence; it demands substantive constraints on what ends agents may pursue, as Kant's categorical imperative demonstrates.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Expected utility theory (von Neumann-Morgenstern) shows that rationality under uncertainty requires additional axioms like independence, which barebones theory omits.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Allais's paradox empirically demonstrates that agents violate independence while satisfying completeness and transitivity, revealing a normative gap the barebones theory cannot address.
      ?

      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.