Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that The explanatory demand is therefore satisfied by contextual narrative accounts without requiring the kind of exceptionless principles generalism posits.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Narrative accounts without principled constraints risk ad-hoc post-hoc reasoning that explains anything and therefore explains nothing.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Context-dependence alone provides no basis for distinguishing genuine explanations from mere descriptions of what happened.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
If explanations need not reflect underlying principles, predictive power and applicability to novel cases become theoretically impossible.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Context-specific narratives capture causally relevant details that universal principles necessarily abstract away or ignore.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Human understanding of complex phenomena (ethics, history, psychology) typically requires grasping particular circumstances, not just rules.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Demanding exceptionless principles creates an artificial explanatory burden that nature may not actually impose.
?
How convincing is this?
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.