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
    Without a framework, no rational argument can be made. — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→The choice of linguistic or conceptual frameworks cannot itself be a matter of rational justification, but only personal preference.

    Without a framework, no rational argument can be made.

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

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

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

    Topics

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Philosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Skepticism
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Carnap holds that rational discourse requires a framework to be in place.The choice of linguistic or conceptual frameworks cannot itself be a matter of r...The choice of which framework to adopt occurs prior to any framework being in pl...

    Similar

    Carnap holds that rational discourse requires a framework to be in pla...80%The choice of linguistic or conceptual frameworks cannot itself be a m...77%There is no neutral, framework-independent standpoint from which to ad...76%Accepting that there is no Archimedean vantage point for choosing amon...75%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: carnap
    View source passageHide passage
    However, it had been assumed that since Carnap required a framework to be in place for any kind of rational discourse to be possible, the choice of frameworks itself must be simply a matter of personal whim, at the level of Hume’s declaration that there is no rational argument for me to prefer the relief of a pain in my little toe to the prevention of some world-engulfing catastrophe. This problem of the irrationality of framework choice (George 2012) or—put another way—the supposed infinite reg

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective