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
    The goal of maximizing true beliefs cannot be specified w... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Clifford's Rule — believe only those propositions that enjoy adequate evidential support — is morally valid

    The goal of maximizing true beliefs cannot be specified without a prior normative account of which truths are significant, which Clifford's Rule does not provide.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Clifford's Rule demands evidence for all beliefs equally, but trivial truths and vital ones require different epistemic thresholds.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Without distinguishing significant from insignificant truths, we cannot coherently rank competing epistemic goals or resolve belief conflicts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A normative account of significance is logically prior because it determines which truths matter enough to justify belief-formation efforts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Clifford's Rule is fundamentally about justified belief, not about which truths to pursue; significance judgments are separate from evidence standards.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Requiring prior normative specification creates regress: any account of significance itself requires justification, potentially infinite regress.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Pragmatic agents naturally prioritize beliefs based on context without explicit normative theory; Clifford's Rule remains valid within any priority scheme.
      ?

      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.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedMoral Responsibility1 linked

    Related

    A normative account of significance is logically prior because it determines whi...Clifford's Rule demands evidence for all beliefs equally, but trivial truths and...Clifford's Rule is fundamentally about justified belief, not about which truths ...Clifford's Rule — believe only those propositions that enjoy adequate evidential...
    +3 moreShow less
    Pragmatic agents naturally prioritize beliefs based on context without explicit ...Requiring prior normative specification creates regress: any account of signific...Without distinguishing significant from insignificant truths, we cannot coherent...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit