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 fact that the proposed universals were discarded does... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The fact that the proposed universals were discarded does not refute Schütze's methodological concern that conflicting judgments held back the development of Government and Binding theory.

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

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Schütze (1996) observed that conflicting judgments of relative unacceptability of violations of two linguistic universals held back the development of Government and Binding theory.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Phillips dismisses this concern on the grounds that the theories dealing with those examples are now largely forgotten and supplanted.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The methodological concern about unreliable data is logically independent of whether the theory that was misled by that data is still accepted.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Skepticism

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.
    Truth & Knowledge

    Key Terms

    Conflicting judgments(in studying how language works)
    Disagreements between linguists or language experts about whether certain sentences or phrases are grammatically correct.
    Government and Binding theory(in theoretical linguistics)
    A influential theory in linguistics (developed by Noam Chomsky in the 1980s) that tries to explain the deep rules all human languages share and how they work.
    Methodological concern(in discussing how research is conducted)
    A worry about whether the methods or approach being used to study something are actually working well or producing reliable results.
    Schütze(as a linguist studying language structure)
    Carson Schütze, a linguist who raised concerns about how contradictory judgments (disagreements about what sentences are grammatically correct) were preventing progress in a major theory of language.
    universals(Debated in Lefèvre's Disceptatio de universali between two students of Chrysippus's academy)
    Either what particular classes of things share, or what those who reason say they share (decided by convention)

    Connections

    2 topics

    Causation1 linkedPhilosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    Abandoning a theory does not constitute abandoning the methods that led that the...Phillips dismisses this concern on the grounds that the theories dealing with th...Schütze (1996) observed that conflicting judgments of relative unacceptability o...The methodological concern about unreliable data is logically independent of whe...

    Similar

    Schütze (1996) observed that conflicting judgments of relative unaccep...87%The Nyāya conception of universals is incoherent80%Any conceptual or formal tension between two theories claiming univers...79%Critical theory constantly reexamines the relation of facts to univers...77%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: linguistics
    View source passageHide passage
    Either Phillips is fronting the surprising opinion that generative theorizing has never been led down the wrong track by demonstrably unreliable data, or he is changing the subject. And unless clear criteria are established for what counts as “damage” and “holding back,” Phillips is not offering any testable hypothesis about data collection methodology. For example, Phillips discounts the observation of Schütze (1996) that conflicting judgments of relative unacceptability of violations of two li
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    1 (0 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit