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 principles of scientific explanation are not reached by any process of reasoning.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Aristotle himself acknowledges in Posterior Analytics II.19 that nous grasps first principles only after repeated perception and memory consolidate into experience.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.This inductive pathway from perception through experience to nous constitutes a cognitive process that precedes and grounds the acceptance of first principles.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, the principles of scientific explanation are reached through an empirical-inductive process, even if the final act of recognition is non-inferential.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kant argues in the Critique of Pure Reason that synthetic a priori principles like causality are not self-evident but require transcendental deduction to establish their objective validity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the principles underwriting scientific explanation require justificatory argument to show they apply to experience, they are reached through a reasoning process, contra the claim.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Each principle of scientific explanation is in some sense self-evident — it 'commands belief of itself' (kath'heautēn einai pistēn) (Top. 100b19–22).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If a principle commands belief of itself, it does not require a prior reasoning process to be accepted.
      ?

      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.