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 Warfield's embrace of this combination thus saddles him with implausible armchair knowledge of the external world, not compatibilism.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Some metaphysical truths about freedom and causation may be knowable through conceptual analysis, not armchair empiricism.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
The charge conflates the method (armchair reasoning) with the implausibility, but method doesn't determine truth-value.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Warfield's position could be defended as concerning logical compatibility, not empirical facts about the world.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Armchair reasoning alone cannot justify beliefs about external world facts without empirical verification.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Warfield's position requires knowing facts about compatibilism's truth without empirical investigation of actual causal processes.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
This conflates a priori conceptual analysis with synthetic knowledge about how the world actually operates.
?
How convincing is this?
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.