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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Wittgenstein's 'On Certainty' distinguishes between hinges we act on and claims we are entitled to assert as justified, blocking the inference from necessity to warrant.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The hinge/warrant distinction is unclear: if hinges are genuinely believed, withholding warrant seems arbitrary rather than principled.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Acting on something without entitlement to assert it suggests a problematic gap between rational action and rational assertion.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.This framework may just relabel skeptical problems rather than solve them—declaring hinges outside justification doesn't explain their status.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Hinges (like 'I have hands') are causally necessary for inquiry but epistemically different—we don't justify them within justificatory practices.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Conflating practical indispensability with epistemic warrant creates a regress: every justified belief would need prior justification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Wittgenstein's distinction preserves both that hinges ground knowledge and that they escape the justification game without paradox.
      ?

      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.
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42