All Questions
Tagged with argumentation epistemology
30
questions
19
votes
19
answers
4k
views
If philosophy is based on reason and rationality, then why is there so much disagreement?
If philosophy is based on reason and rationality, then why is there so much disagreement?
Is it due primarily to operating with different premises absent consensus on their truth, so that dissenters ...
- 1,251
17
votes
8
answers
6k
views
Is it fallacious to argue that something is correct, of good quality, or acceptable because a community of experts has established it as such?
Earlier today, I asked a programming question on a forum. I phrased the question as "What is the best way to do x?" Someone responded with something to the effect of, "the best way is ...
- 297
11
votes
6
answers
3k
views
What practical methods can be used to prove a negative claim?
I realize that the burden of proof falls squarely on the shoulders of the person making the claim, but they often seem unwilling to do the footwork.
It is difficult to prove a negative case except by ...
- 213
11
votes
6
answers
2k
views
Is it a "shifting of the burden of proof" if I show evidence in favor of a position, and ask the audience to debate that evidence if they disagree?
As far as I know, the "fallacy of shifting the burden of proof" is to refuse to show any evidence for my position, demanding the opponent to show evidence against my position, and claiming ...
- 384
10
votes
9
answers
3k
views
How well does the following argument work as a counter towards unfalsifiable supernatural claims?
Human perception is solely naturalistic; as such, empiricism and logic generated by human perception and interpretation of reality is strictly naturalistic as well.
Absence of evidence is not evidence ...
- 109
7
votes
5
answers
563
views
How can I solve my contradictory thoughts about the relevance of human knowledge?
I have been thinking about how much we can know and more importantly: which knowledge should be relevant to us? First I will explain my thoughts to you. They will end in a questionable conclusion for ...
- 279
6
votes
2
answers
3k
views
How does one differentiate epistemological and ontological claims?
I'm taking an introductory philosophy course and I find it fascinating. I can't really figure out an assignment though because I'm a bit foggy on what the difference between ontological and ...
- 61
5
votes
2
answers
156
views
What is the epistemic justification for hearsay?
In the United States, Donald Trump's election has been all the rage, and his Tweets and public declarations have received much attention, especially those that accuse CNN and the "liberal media" in ...
4
votes
6
answers
459
views
Is the principle of uniformity of nature an abduction or an analogy?
Is the principle of uniformity of nature an abduction or an analogy?
To what type of reasoning does the principle of uniformity of nature belong? Is it abduction, analogy, deduction?
Here they refer ...
- 569
4
votes
2
answers
227
views
Are retorsion arguments in epistemology generally problematic?
An retorsion argument consists in pointing out how a claim is self-defeating.
Of course, I accept that there are sound arguments of this type that don't misrepresent the original position. But they ...
- 4,841
4
votes
5
answers
199
views
Concepts with inexistant definitions but for which our common intuition is enough for practical usage
There are some concept that most people (if not sometimes all people) fail to accurately define - eventually because the concept does not match a natural category - however we all have a good enough ...
- 1,113
3
votes
15
answers
2k
views
Proof for the absence of free will?
EDIT (17/08/2022): I have answered this question with an evolution of the argument. See accepted answer below.
There are a number of arguments which aim to prove the impossibility of free will.
The ...
- 4,439
3
votes
9
answers
3k
views
What is the burden of proof? Has this principle ever been challenged?
I have been surprised to find that some people doubt this principle. Onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat - the burden of proof lies with the speaker, not with the one who negates. I ...
- 2,341
3
votes
9
answers
601
views
How can we decide which view to accept concerning our ultimate justification of our knowledge (Münchhausen trilemma)?
I recently came across the Münchhausen trilemma, which I think helps to explain my question. Basically, according to the trilemma, we have three options for explaining the ultimate justification of ...
- 296
3
votes
2
answers
329
views
Could 'ought' be defined as sentimentalism?
The traditional definition of ought is "moral obligation" as defined by multiple online dictionaries. Some authors, like Harris, have defined ought as maximizing expected well being (a fancy way of ...
- 181