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
    We are not justified in believing that we are not victims... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    We are not justified in believing that we are not victims of a skeptical scenario

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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.There is epistemic symmetry between what we take to be the actual case and a skeptical scenario
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If we were victims of a skeptical scenario, we would not know that we are victims of a skeptical scenario
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Given epistemic symmetry, even if we are not victims of a skeptical scenario, we do not know that we are not victims of a skeptical scenario
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Justification is determined by internal coherence and reliability of belief-forming processes within one's actual epistemic situation, not by comparison to logically possible alternatives.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The mere logical possibility of a skeptical scenario does not defeat justification unless there is positive reason to treat that possibility as a live epistemic option.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, absent positive evidence for a skeptical scenario, our ordinary perceptual and inferential practices confer justification on beliefs about the external world.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The denial of a skeptical scenario ('I am not a BIV') is a Moorean hinge proposition that constitutes the framework within which epistemic evaluation occurs, not a claim subject to that evaluation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Wittgenstein's On Certainty establishes that some propositions function as bedrock certainties that stand fast for us, structuring our language-games rather than requiring independent justification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Applying the standards of ordinary justification to framework-constituting propositions commits a category error that invalidates P5's inference from ignorance to lack of justification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Topics

    Skepticism

    Related

    Applying the standards of ordinary justification to framework-constituting propo...Given epistemic symmetry, even if we are not victims of a skeptical scenario, we...If we know that we do not know that p, then we are not even justified in believi...If we were victims of a skeptical scenario, we would not know that we are victim...
    +7 moreShow less
    Justification is determined by internal coherence and reliability of belief-form...The denial of a skeptical scenario ('I am not a BIV') is a Moorean hinge proposi...The mere logical possibility of a skeptical scenario does not defeat justificati...There is epistemic symmetry between what we take to be the actual case and a ske...Therefore, absent positive evidence for a skeptical scenario, our ordinary perce...We know that we do not know that we are not victims of a skeptical scenarioWittgenstein's On Certainty establishes that some propositions function as bedro...

    Similar

    We know that we do not know that we are not victims of a skeptical sce...90%If we were victims of a skeptical scenario, we would not know that we ...90%CP2 — the claim that we are not justified in denying the skeptical hyp...86%We are not justified in believing the contents of our intuitions80%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: skepticism
    View source passageHide passage
    Let’s go back to the rough idea that there is some kind of epistemic symmetry between what we take to be the actual case and a skeptical scenario. Of course, if we were the victims in a skeptical scenario, we wouldn’t know that we are not (if only because it would be false, but perhaps not only because of that). Given symmetry, even if we are not victims of a skeptical scenario, we do not know that we are not. Moreover, we know all of this. As we suggested in section 1, if we know that we don’t
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit