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 laws of nature and the principles of logic are irreducible to the process of empirical generalization

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Mill's methods demonstrate that logical principles like non-contradiction are confirmed through universal perceptual agreement across all observed cases.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A principle confirmed without a single counterinstance across all human experience is functionally indistinguishable from an empirical generalization with maximal inductive support.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The psychological necessity we feel toward logical laws tracks evolutionary selection for accurate reasoning, not access to mind-independent logical facts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Quine's holism entails that logical principles occupy the interior of the web of belief but remain revisable in response to sufficiently recalcitrant experience.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If logical laws are in principle revisable under empirical pressure, as paraconsistent logics applied to quantum phenomena suggest, they cannot be categorically distinct from empirical generalizations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Principles such as the principle of non-contradiction cannot be obtained merely by induction
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Such principles cannot be obtained by an accumulation of observations
      ?

      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.