User Tools

Site Tools

Trace:
what_s_this_all_about

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision 		Previous revision
what_s_this_all_about [2022/09/13 07:38]
154.54.249.207 old revision restored (2021/05/24 11:19) 		what_s_this_all_about [2025/01/19 14:28] (current)
4.227.36.41 old revision restored (2024/07/15 08:07)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +What is Carmelics all about?
 +
 We all share important questions. In fact, they're really important. Like, course-of-your-life-altering, fate-of-the-world-determining, important. But how do we go about answering them? We all share important questions. In fact, they're really important. Like, course-of-your-life-altering, fate-of-the-world-determining, important. But how do we go about answering them?
  
Line 11: Line 13:
 ---------------- ----------------
  
-Sound interesting? You can join in the discussion by [[learning how to format arguments properly]] and adding arguments to the discussions--your own or popular ones of history.+Sound interesting? You can join in the discussion by [[learning how to format statements properly]] and adding arguments to the discussions--your own or popular ones of history.
  
-If you're weeping at the awful state of this website, you might be a web developer. Want to help make this better? Please get in contact! __loyalcj at outlook dot com__+If you're weeping at the awful state of this website, you might be a web developer. Want to help make this better? Please get in contact! <loyalcj@outlook.com>
  
 If you're a philosopher, you might notice a couple limitations of this strategy: can the same arguments, reduced to be a simple as possible, be represented in multiple different types of syllogistic arguments? When linking similar arguments, who gets to decide when one argument is the exact same as another? Is this favoring a coherentist approach to knowledge by its very design? While I (Loyal) don't find problems with any of these, I would be happy to talk with you about any of them. It remains to be demonstrated, however, whether arguments can have multiple valid structures or if the very nature of a structure biases people toward a conclusion. If you're a philosopher, you might notice a couple limitations of this strategy: can the same arguments, reduced to be a simple as possible, be represented in multiple different types of syllogistic arguments? When linking similar arguments, who gets to decide when one argument is the exact same as another? Is this favoring a coherentist approach to knowledge by its very design? While I (Loyal) don't find problems with any of these, I would be happy to talk with you about any of them. It remains to be demonstrated, however, whether arguments can have multiple valid structures or if the very nature of a structure biases people toward a conclusion.
 +
 +[[Why the name Carmelics]]?
  
 Thanks for visiting! Thanks for visiting!
 +
 + --- //[[loyalcj@outlook.com|Loyal Juraschek]] 2021/05/24 11:20//
what_s_this_all_about.1663069109.txt.gz ยท Last modified: 2022/09/13 07:38 by 154.54.249.207

Page Tools

Except where otherwise noted, content on this wiki is licensed under the following license: CC Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 International
CC Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 International Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki