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 original dilemma can be turned back on the interrogator

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.If the accused person is modest, the accusation should proceed because the accused will be concerned by such a charge
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the accused person is bad, the accusation should also proceed because the accused is not a good man
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A disjunctive argument can be duplicated and redirected against its originator
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Disjunctive arguments derive their force from logical structure, not from the identity or standing of the party who deploys them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If a dilemma's branches collectively exhaust the relevant possibilities, any party facing those same conditions falls under its scope equally.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Valla's humanist jurisprudence, following Roman rhetorical practice, treats retorsio argumenti as a legitimate and symmetrical dialectical move.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.An interrogator who constructs a dilemma implicitly commits to the validity of its logical form, binding themselves to its consequences under analogous conditions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Pragmatic self-refutation, recognized from the Sophists through Wittgenstein's rule-following considerations, holds that one cannot coherently wield a logical tool one is simultaneously exempt from.
      ?

      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.