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 Uniformity Principle cannot be justified by arguing that it works, because that justification itself requires an inductive argument, making the reasoning circular

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Inductive inferences presuppose the Uniformity Principle
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The presupposition of the Uniformity Principle must itself be supported by an argument for the inductive inference to be justified
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The natural justification for the Uniformity Principle is that it has worked in past instances
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Any justification of the Uniformity Principle that appeals to its past success must itself assume future resemblance to past instances to count as evidence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Assuming future resemblance to past instances just is the Uniformity Principle, so the argument smuggles in precisely what it seeks to establish.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Hume's fork establishes that only relations of ideas or matters of fact can ground justification, and the Uniformity Principle fits neither category non-circularly.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Reichenbach's pragmatic vindication concedes that induction cannot be proven valid, only that if any method works, induction will—which is itself a conditional requiring inductive support.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A justification that succeeds only if induction already succeeds provides no independent epistemic leverage against the skeptic who doubts induction from the outset.
      ?

      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.