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 Clustering Postulate fails to adequately justify analogical reasoning

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 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

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 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 against 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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.