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 There is no absolute truth as postulated by either dogmatism or skepticism.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
2 perspectives
Reason for 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.
?
How convincing is this?
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.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reason for 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.
?
How convincing is this?
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'.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Truth is defined as lived experience of truth — that is, evidence.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Evidence is revealed exclusively in present experience.
?
How convincing is this?
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.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Show 1 more premise
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.