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 project to explain science from within science could ... — Carmelics
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The project to explain science from within science could ultimately vindicate global skepticism

    Skepticism
    ?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.The project to explain science from within science could defeat itself
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the project defeats itself, the skeptic is vindicated
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Neurath's coherentist model shows science can be self-correcting without requiring an external Archimedean standpoint for justification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A self-refuting naturalistic project would undermine only that particular research program, not the epistemic credentials of science as a whole.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Quine's epistemic naturalism entails that circularity in vindicating science is not vicious, since no non-question-begging foundation is available to any epistemology.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If all epistemologies face analogous circularity, the skeptic cannot selectively deploy self-defeat as a decisive objection against naturalism alone.
      ?

      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

    Skepticism

    Connections

    1 topic

    Truth & Knowledge1 linked

    Related

    A self-refuting naturalistic project would undermine only that particular resear...If all epistemologies face analogous circularity, the skeptic cannot selectively...If the project defeats itself, the skeptic is vindicatedNeurath's coherentist model shows science can be self-correcting without requiri...
    +2 moreShow less
    Quine's epistemic naturalism entails that circularity in vindicating science is ...The project to explain science from within science could defeat itself

    Similar

    The project to explain science from within science could defeat itself87%The most troubling source of skepticism arises from the scientific und...80%The Darwinian appeal to explain science from within science may not su...79%Circular attempts to explain science within its own terms are legitima...77%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: moral-epistemology
    View source passageHide passage
    Two kinds of replies to this objection are worth considering. The first, suggested in the brief statement of Quine’s new methodology, is to reject the old problem as based on the false presupposition that one can vindicate scientific and other knowledge on the basis of propositions that are knowable a priori. The difficulty with this response is that it raises the difficult issues of whether a priori knowledge is possible and whether we can determine an answer to that question a posteriori. Anot
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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