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
    Wittgenstein's rule-following considerations show that ap... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→The legal effect of the Road Traffic Act does not depend merely on physical facts and social facts.

    Wittgenstein's rule-following considerations show that applying concepts tracks shared social responses, not evaluation-transcendent norms.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Rule-following requires criteria for correctness that cannot be found in private mental states or abstract platonism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Wittgenstein's beetle-in-the-box argument shows that ostensive definitions gain meaning only through communal agreement.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Empirically, concept mastery develops through socialization; isolated individuals cannot establish stable rule applications.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Shared responses can be mistaken; communities have historically agreed on objectively false empirical and logical truths.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Wittgenstein's critique targets private rule-following specifically, not all rule objectivity—leaving normative realism open.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Mathematical and logical rules appear evaluation-transcendent: no community consensus makes 2+2=5 correct, even collectively.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedPhilosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    Empirically, concept mastery develops through socialization; isolated individual...Mathematical and logical rules appear evaluation-transcendent: no community cons...Rule-following requires criteria for correctness that cannot be found in private...Shared responses can be mistaken; communities have historically agreed on object...
    +3 moreShow less
    The legal effect of the Road Traffic Act does not depend merely on physical fact...Wittgenstein's beetle-in-the-box argument shows that ostensive definitions gain ...Wittgenstein's critique targets private rule-following specifically, not all rul...

    Details

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