Skip to content

Topics Thinkers Changes ContributorsLoading 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

Made within

DC&

Austin

Statements: 321,452
Perspectives: 108,905
Topics: 42

Therefore, even if false principles were the more common ... — Carmelics

History Edit See Inverse

Part of a larger discussion

Challenges→Most human errors in reasoning stem from false principles rather than from invalid inference

Therefore, even if false principles were the more common cause historically, this would not establish that invalid inference is a lesser or subordinate category of error in any logically significant sense.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

1 reason for

1 reason against

Reasons For

1 perspective

Reason for

?

1.Logical categories are determined by their structural properties, not by historical frequency of occurrence in human reasoning.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.Invalid inference violates fundamental laws of logic (like non-contradiction), making it distinct in kind from errors of premise.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.A category's theoretical significance depends on its definitional boundaries, which remain constant regardless of empirical prevalence.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

Reasons Against

1 perspective

Reason against

?

1.If invalid inferences rarely occur in practice, they may have less explanatory power for understanding actual human error patterns.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.The distinction between false premises and invalid inference may collapse in real reasoning, where both often co-occur systematically.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.Logical significance should reflect what categories of error actually matter for evaluating reasoning quality in substantive domains.
?
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.

Key Terms

Category of error(as used in logic and epistemology): A type or group of mistakes that share something in common.
Invalid inference(a jump to a conclusion that isn't properly supported by the evidence): A logical argument or conclusion that doesn't properly follow from its starting points; flawed reasoning.
Logically significant(as used in formal logic): Important in a way that matters to how reasoning and logic actually work, not just what happens to be true in real life.
Subordinate(legal philosophy): Lower in rank, importance, or authority; treated as less fundamental than something else.
false principles(Contrasted with formal fallacies; identified as the primary source of human reasoning error): Foundational premises or starting assumptions that are incorrect, as distinguished from invalid logical inference from premises

Connections

2 topics

Truth & Knowledge1 linked Skepticism1 linked

Related

A category's theoretical significance depends on its definitional boundaries, wh...If invalid inferences rarely occur in practice, they may have less explanatory p...Invalid inference violates fundamental laws of logic (like non-contradiction), m...Logical categories are determined by their structural properties, not by histori...

+3 moreShow less

Logical significance should reflect what categories of error actually matter for...Most human errors in reasoning stem from false principles rather than from inval...

Details

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

The distinction between false premises and invalid inference may collapse in rea...