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
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that When a premise entails a conclusion as a condition of its own coherence, the resulting argument is not weak but analytically compelling.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Analytical necessity doesn't guarantee truth about reality; a premise can be internally coherent yet factually false or irrelevant.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Many analytically valid arguments are trivial tautologies (A=A) that add no substantive knowledge despite logical compulsion.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Strength of argument should reflect both logical form and informational content; pure coherence conditions lack the latter.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Logical entailment means the conclusion is already implicit in the premise's meaning, making rejection self-contradictory.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Arguments deriving conclusions from internal logical necessity possess greater certainty than those depending on external empirical support.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Coherence is a fundamental criterion of rational justification; premises that require their conclusions maintain rational standards.
      ?

      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.