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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that The substitutional criterion for validity is not the only criterion by which arguments/consequences can be valid.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Ockham's razor demands that validity criteria not be multiplied beyond necessity if one criterion suffices to account for all valid inferences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The substitutional criterion, properly formalized with unrestricted substitution over all terms, captures every inference preserved across all interpretations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If substitutional validity under unrestricted term-substitution extensionally coincides with all valid inferences, positing additional criteria adds no explanatory power.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Buridan's own examples of non-substitutionally-valid consequences, such as 'A man runs, therefore an animal runs', are reducible to enthymemes with suppressed logical or metaphysical premises.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If every apparent counterexample to substitutional sufficiency resolves into an enthymeme, the additional criterion tracks background assumptions rather than a genuinely distinct validity relation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Medieval logicians including Albert of Saxony treated material consequences as pragmatically useful but not as exhibiting a formally distinct mode of validity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Buridan accepts the form/matter distinction based on syncategorematic versus categorematic terms.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Buridan does not hold the thesis that only arguments satisfying the substitutional criterion are valid.
      ?

      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.