Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that The regress argument thus collapses if psychology is a failed proto-science rather than an irreducible special science.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Psychology successfully predicts behavior and generates testable theories independent of neurobiology, meeting core criteria for special science status.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Calling psychology 'failed' begs the question—it assumes reducibility rather than arguing that autonomous psychological laws are impossible.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Multiple realizability of mental states in different physical substrates shows psychology cannot collapse into neurobiology without explanatory loss.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Psychology's explanatory gaps (consciousness, intentionality) suggest it lacks fundamental principles needed for a genuine special science.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If psychology reduces to neurobiology, the regress of mental explanations terminates at physical laws, avoiding infinite justification.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Proto-sciences like alchemy failed because they posited irreducible entities; psychology's mental causes may face the same fatal flaw.
?
How convincing is this?
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.