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 ci... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Generalism about reasons is not supported by the demand that differing valences of a feature across cases must be explained.

    Wittgenstein's rule-following considerations show that citing a rule does not itself settle how it applies without further interpretive context.

    ?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.A rule's symbols are intrinsically ambiguous: '+' could mean addition, or a deviant function that diverges at large numbers.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Past applications of a rule underdetermine future ones; infinite rule-interpretations fit any finite history of use.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Invoking another rule to clarify the first merely pushes the problem back; infinite regress of interpretations threatens.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Wittgenstein conflates conceptual underdetermination with practical indeterminacy; we successfully apply rules consistently daily.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Community practice and training establish a shared standard that constrains interpretation without requiring explicit additional rules.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The rule-following paradox assumes rules must be self-applying; but meaning just is the use-pattern in a linguistic community.
      ?

      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

    1 topic

    Moral Responsibility1 linked

    Related

    A rule's symbols are intrinsically ambiguous: '+' could mean addition, or a devi...Community practice and training establish a shared standard that constrains inte...Generalism about reasons is not supported by the demand that differing valences ...Invoking another rule to clarify the first merely pushes the problem back; infin...
    +3 moreShow less
    Past applications of a rule underdetermine future ones; infinite rule-interpreta...The rule-following paradox assumes rules must be self-applying; but meaning just...Wittgenstein conflates conceptual underdetermination with practical indeterminac...

    Details

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