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 claim that Rosser's predicate is unsuitable conflates a system's formal derivability facts with the philosophical content of consistency, which Rosser's construction legitimately captures under one coherent interpretation.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Rosser's predicate requires complexity assumptions (like provable totality of a fast-growing function) that standard consistency doesn't require philosophically.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The philosophical content of consistency is independent of formal machinery; conflating formal devices with philosophical meaning inverts the explanatory direction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Rosser's predicate is strictly stronger than classical consistency and proves different theorems, suggesting it captures something philosophically distinct.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Rosser's predicate captures consistency by formalizing the absence of contradictory proofs, which is the core philosophical content of consistency.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Multiple formal systems can express the same consistency property through different predicates, so formal derivability details don't determine philosophical validity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Rosser's construction avoids Gödel's self-reference diagonalization, offering a coherent alternative interpretation of what consistency formally requires.
      ?

      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.