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 determination rule analysis justifies analogical argu... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Causation
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The determination rule analysis justifies analogical arguments without trivializing them by making the source domain irrelevant.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.A determination rule specifies that the value of Q is determined by the values of P1, …, Pm.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If source S and target T agree on all values Pi, then Q(T) = Q(S) follows validly.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Knowledge of the source domain is necessary: Q(T) cannot be derived from the determination rule alone.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.A determination rule must itself be established by induction or analogy from prior cases, creating a regress that presupposes the validity it purports to ground.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Hempel's theoretic-concept problem shows that nomological rules underdetermine which properties are projectible, so the rule selection already encodes analogical assumptions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The source domain is therefore doing hidden epistemic work in justifying the rule, not merely illustrating it, contradicting the claim of non-trivialization.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Goodman's grue paradox demonstrates that for any target property Q, infinitely many determination rules are consistent with source-domain evidence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Without an independent criterion for selecting the correct rule, the analyst must appeal to similarity judgments between source and target to privilege one rule over rivals.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.This circularity means the determination rule analysis covertly depends on the analogical reasoning it was introduced to replace.
      ?

      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

    CausationTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    2 topics

    Modality & Possibility1 linkedSkepticism1 linked

    Related

    A determination rule must itself be established by induction or analogy from pri...A determination rule specifies that the value of Q is determined by the values o...Goodman's grue paradox demonstrates that for any target property Q, infinitely m...Hempel's theoretic-concept problem shows that nomological rules underdetermine w...
    +5 moreShow less
    If source S and target T agree on all values Pi, then Q(T) = Q(S) follows validl...Knowledge of the source domain is necessary: Q(T) cannot be derived from the det...The source domain is therefore doing hidden epistemic work in justifying the rul...

    Similar

    Analogical reasoning can be justified by determination rules without t...88%Establishing the plausibility of a determination rule is at least as d...85%Establishing the plausibility of a determination rule is at least as d...85%The Aristotelian deductive analysis of analogical arguments renders th...84%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: reasoning-analogy
    View source passageHide passage
    Analogical arguments support the hypothesis that in each of these cultures, rock art symbolizes hallucinogenic experiences. Currie examines criteria that focus on assumptions about stability of cultural traits and environment-culture relationships. Currie (2016, 2018) and Wylie (Wylie and Chapman 2016) also stress the importance of robustness reasoning that combines analogical arguments of moderate strength with other forms of evidence to yield strong conclusions. Practice-based approaches can
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

    This circularity means the determination rule analysis covertly depends on the a...
    Without an independent criterion for selecting the correct rule, the analyst mus...
    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit