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
    The project of formalizing analogical inference in terms ... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The project of formalizing analogical inference in terms of one or more simple formal schemata is doomed.

    Philosophy of LanguageTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.If analogical reasoning is required to conform only to a simple formal schema, the restriction is too permissive and authorizes inferences that clearly should not pass muster.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Attempts to remedy this by developing more elaborate formal templates always leave some part of the analysis that must be handled intuitively, without guidance from strict formal rules.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.No elaboration of formal templates has proven sufficient to eliminate the need for intuitive judgment.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Formal probabilistic frameworks, such as structure-mapping theory (Gentner) and Bayesian analogical inference models, have demonstrably increased predictive precision over purely intuitive analogical reasoning.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The residual role of intuitive judgment in applying a formal schema does not invalidate the schema, since all formal systems, including deductive logic, require non-formal judgment in application.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The existence of partial formalization constitutes progress toward adequacy, not evidence that formalization is 'doomed', as Polya's work on plausible reasoning shows cumulative refinement is possible.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Hesse's material analogy framework and Bartha's articulation model successfully distinguish valid from invalid analogical inferences using explicit structural criteria grounded in prior theoretical commitments.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The claim conflates the difficulty of complete formalization with impossibility, committing a fallacy of inference that Carnap's program for inductive logic explicitly warned against when critics declared inductive formalization hopeless.
      ?

      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.

    Topics

    Philosophy of LanguageTruth & Knowledge

    Related

    Attempts to remedy this by developing more elaborate formal templates always lea...Formal probabilistic frameworks, such as structure-mapping theory (Gentner) and ...Hesse's material analogy framework and Bartha's articulation model successfully ...If analogical reasoning is required to conform only to a simple formal schema, t...
    +4 moreShow less
    No elaboration of formal templates has proven sufficient to eliminate the need f...The claim conflates the difficulty of complete formalization with impossibility,...The existence of partial formalization constitutes progress toward adequacy, not...The residual role of intuitive judgment in applying a formal schema does not inv...

    Similar

    The search for a simple, universal formal rule of analogical inference...85%Each analogical inference is warranted not by a universal formal schem...84%No single formal schema can capture the full range of locally relevant...83%Greater systematicity is not sufficient for a more plausible analogica...83%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: reasoning-analogy
    View source passageHide passage
    Yet it would be absurd to find positive support from this analogy for the idea that we are likely to find congruent lines clustered in groups of two or more, just because swans of the same color are commonly found in groups. The positive analogy is antecedently known to be irrelevant to the hypothetical analogy. In such a case, the analogical inference should be utterly rejected. Yet rule (5) would wrongly assign non-zero degree of support. To generalize the difficulty: not every similarity inc
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit