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 sampling argument analysis of analogical reasoning fa... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The sampling argument analysis of analogical reasoning fails due to the counting problem

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Goodman's grue paradox demonstrates that no principled, non-circular criterion exists for distinguishing projectible from non-projectible predicates.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Without such a criterion, any sampling argument over shared properties presupposes the very inductive validity it claims to establish.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.This vicious circularity undermines the sampling argument independent of how generously or narrowly one counts the property population.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Quine's ontological relativity shows that property individuation is relative to a background theory, making property counts theory-dependent rather than objective.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the ratio of shared to total properties shifts with theoretical framework, the sampling argument yields incompatible probability estimates for the same analogy simultaneously.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The sampling argument requires counting similarities and differences between domains
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The population of properties is poorly defined
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The ratio of shared to total known properties varies dramatically depending on how properties are counted
      ?

      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

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge

    Related

    Goodman's grue paradox demonstrates that no principled, non-circular criterion e...If the ratio of shared to total properties shifts with theoretical framework, th...Quine's ontological relativity shows that property individuation is relative to ...The population of properties is poorly defined
    +4 moreShow less
    The ratio of shared to total known properties varies dramatically depending on h...The sampling argument requires counting similarities and differences between dom...This vicious circularity undermines the sampling argument independent of how gen...Without such a criterion, any sampling argument over shared properties presuppos...

    Similar

    The sampling argument analysis of analogical reasoning fails due to th...90%The Clustering Postulate fails to adequately justify analogical reason...80%Greater systematicity is not sufficient for a more plausible analogica...78%Systematicity alone does not determine the plausibility of an analogic...77%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: reasoning-analogy
    View source passageHide passage
    Recasting analogy as a deductive argument may help to bring out background assumptions, but it makes little headway with the problem of justification. That problem re-appears as the need to state and establish the plausibility of a determination rule, and that is at least as difficult as justifying the original analogical argument. 2 Inductive justification Some philosophers have attempted to portray, and justify, analogical reasoning in terms of some well-understood inductive argument pattern.
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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