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
    The Clustering Postulate fails to adequately justify anal... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The Clustering Postulate fails to adequately justify analogical reasoning

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Goodman's grue paradox demonstrates that purely formal, syntax-level constraints cannot distinguish projectible from non-projectible predicates in inductive inference.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The Clustering Postulate, operating at the syntactic level of attribute co-occurrence, faces an analogous entrenchment problem: it cannot privilege scientifically relevant clusters over gerrymandered ones.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Without an account of predicate entrenchment or causal relevance, the Postulate licenses arbitrary analogies as readily as legitimate ones, undermining its justificatory role.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Hesse's own positive analogy criterion requires that shared properties be causally or nomically connected to the inferred property, a condition irreducibly material and not capturable by co-occurrence statistics.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The Clustering Postulate's probabilistic co-occurrence metric conflates accidental correlations with law-like regularities, a distinction Hempel showed is essential to legitimate inductive support.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.A purely syntactic axiom such as the Clustering Postulate fails to discriminate between good analogical arguments and those clearly without value
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Hesse's own material criteria distinguish good from bad analogical arguments
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The Clustering Postulate cannot replicate those material distinctions
      ?

      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

    All sources support it1 linked

    Related

    A purely syntactic axiom such as the Clustering Postulate fails to discriminate ...Goodman's grue paradox demonstrates that purely formal, syntax-level constraints...Hesse's own material criteria distinguish good from bad analogical argumentsHesse's own positive analogy criterion requires that shared properties be causal...
    +4 moreShow less
    The Clustering Postulate cannot replicate those material distinctionsThe Clustering Postulate's probabilistic co-occurrence metric conflates accident...The Clustering Postulate, operating at the syntactic level of attribute co-occur...Without an account of predicate entrenchment or causal relevance, the Postulate ...

    Similar

    The success-based justification of Pythagorean analogical reasoning is...90%A general justification of analogical reasoning cannot support all arg...87%Recasting analogy as a deductive argument does not solve the problem o...87%Norton's material theory of analogical reasoning fails to provide usef...87%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: reasoning-analogy
    View source passageHide passage
    Recasting analogy as a deductive argument may help to bring out background assumptions, but it makes little headway with the problem of justification. That problem re-appears as the need to state and establish the plausibility of a determination rule, and that is at least as difficult as justifying the original analogical argument. 2 Inductive justification Some philosophers have attempted to portray, and justify, analogical reasoning in terms of some well-understood inductive argument pattern.
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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