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 generalist reading of 'that is stealing, and therefore you should not do it' implicitly appeals to a principle

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Wittgenstein's rule-following considerations show that citing a rule in reasoning does not entail the rule is doing the inferential work.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The word 'stealing' already encodes normative force via thick ethical concepts, making the generalist premise redundant rather than implicit.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A speaker can competently deploy 'therefore' between two moral claims without committing to any universal principle connecting them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Ryle's distinction between knowing-that and knowing-how shows moral inference can be a trained skill rather than the application of stored propositional principles.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The 'silent premise' move in reconstructing arguments (per Toulmin's critique of syllogistic models) smuggles in logical form that need not reflect the speaker's actual commitments.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The fully specified generalist reading is: 'that is stealing and stealing is always wrong; therefore that is wrong'
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.This reading introduces a silent appeal to a principle—either absolute or contributory
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The presence of such a principle means what is expressed is a genuine inference with premises and a conclusion
      ?

      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.