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 demand that the principle of the uniformity of nature be verified is nonsensical

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The principle of the uniformity of nature is an absolute presupposition, not a proposition
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The notion of verifiability applies only to propositions, not to absolute presuppositions
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Absolute presuppositions do their work in so far as they are presupposed, not in so far as they are true or believed to be true
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Verification requires a standard external to the claim being tested, but the uniformity of nature is presupposed by every empirical testing procedure itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Any attempt to verify uniformity of nature would circularly employ the very regularities whose universality is in question, rendering the demand self-undermining.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Wittgenstein's rule-following considerations show that no finite set of observations can logically compel a universal pattern, making verification of uniformity in principle impossible.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kant demonstrated that causal necessity and natural uniformity are conditions of possible experience, not objects discoverable within experience.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.What functions as a transcendental condition for the possibility of empirical inquiry cannot itself be subject to empirical confirmation without a category error.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Demanding empirical verification of the preconditions for empirical inquiry conflates the logical order of justification with the temporal order of inquiry.
      ?

      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.