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
    There is no absolute truth as postulated by either dogmat... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    There is no absolute truth as postulated by either dogmatism or skepticism.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Truth is defined as lived experience of truth — that is, evidence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Evidence is revealed exclusively in present experience.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Truth is always and exclusively tested in present experience, as one cannot relive the flux of experience.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Logical and mathematical truths (e.g., modus ponens, 2+2=4) hold necessarily across all possible experience, not merely present lived evidence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If truth were exhausted by present experiential evidence, the very premises used to argue against absolute truth could not themselves be stably true.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Peirce's pragmatist account grounds truth in the ideal limit of inquiry converging across all inquirers, not in any single subject's present experience.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A truth defined entirely by individual present revision cannot distinguish genuine correction from mere change, undermining the normative force of 'surpassing'.
      ?

      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

    Connections

    2 topics

    Perception1 linkedPhilosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    A truth defined entirely by individual present revision cannot distinguish genui...Evidence is revealed exclusively in present experience.If truth were exhausted by present experiential evidence, the very premises used...Logical and mathematical truths (e.g., modus ponens, 2+2=4) hold necessarily acr...
    +4 moreShow less
    Peirce's pragmatist account grounds truth in the ideal limit of inquiry convergi...Truth defines itself in process, as revision, correction, and self-surpassing.Truth is always and exclusively tested in present experience, as one cannot reli...

    Similar

    If there is no absolute truth, then the statement 'There is no truth' ...83%The claim 'There is no absolute truth' is self-refuting81%Fallibilism is dialectically weak against both skepticism and dogmatis...81%There is no truth or veridicality80%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: gasset
    View source passageHide passage
    Our discussion thus far makes manifest Ortega’s ambivalence toward phenomenology. After he learned of Husserl’s Crisis of European Sciences, Ortega did not argue that his later general position and that of phenomenology were “diametrically opposed”. Indeed, in a long footnote at the conclusion of Notes on Thinking, Ortega invited a comparison between himself and Husserl. In 1935, Husserl presented a series of four lectures in Prague on “Philosophy in the Crisis of European Mankind”, all of which
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

    Truth is defined as lived experience of truth — that is, evidence.
    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit