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 puzzle's force derives from rationality norms on beli... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Either Pierre's doxastic position cannot be as described in §2.6 or London and Londres are different cities (or we must punt).

    The puzzle's force derives from rationality norms on belief, not from metaphysical claims about identity, so Church's modal argument conflates epistemic and ontological levels.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Rational belief norms (like avoiding inconsistency) are about coherence, not about what entities fundamentally exist or are identical.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Church's argument derives impossibility of identity from epistemic facts about substitution in belief contexts, not from metaphysical identity facts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Conflating these levels mistakes a constraint on rational thought for a constraint on reality itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.If belief contexts block substitution, this reflects genuine metaphysical opacity about identity, not merely epistemic limitations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Rationality norms on belief presuppose facts about what entities are identical; the argument can't be purely epistemic without circularity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Church shows identity claims about distinct computational properties lead to absurdity—a metaphysical problem, not an epistemic one.
      ?

      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.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Philosophy of Language1 linkedPersonal Identity1 linked

    Related

    Church shows identity claims about distinct computational properties lead to abs...Church's argument derives impossibility of identity from epistemic facts about s...Conflating these levels mistakes a constraint on rational thought for a constrai...Either Pierre's doxastic position cannot be as described in §2.6 or London and L...
    +3 moreShow less
    If belief contexts block substitution, this reflects genuine metaphysical opacit...Rational belief norms (like avoiding inconsistency) are about coherence, not abo...Rationality norms on belief presuppose facts about what entities are identical; ...

    Details

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