Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A claim is a substantive statement about a thing, such as an idea, event, individual, or belief. It's truth or falsity is open to debate. It's truth or falsity is open to debate. Arguments or beliefs may be offered in support, and criticisms and challenges of affirming contentions may be offered in rebuttal.
A claim right is a right which entails responsibilities, ... Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy; The Difference Between a Right and Liberty, Professor William E. May
A negative claim is the opposite of an affirmative or positive claim. It asserts the non-existence or exclusion of something. [10] Logicians and philosophers of logic reject the notion that it is intrinsically impossible to prove negative claims.
A truth claim is an assertion held to be true in a religious belief system; however, it does not follow that the assertion can be proven true. For example, a truth claim in Judaism is that only one God exists, while other religions are polytheistic. Conflicting truth claims between different religions can be a cause of religious conflict.
The Gettier problem, in the field of epistemology, is a landmark philosophical problem concerning the understanding of descriptive knowledge.Attributed to American philosopher Edmund Gettier, Gettier-type counterexamples (called "Gettier-cases") challenge the long-held justified true belief (JTB) account of knowledge.
The claim "I am definitely a British citizen" has a greater degree of force than the claim "I am a British citizen, presumably". (See also: Defeasible reasoning .) The first three elements, claim , ground , and warrant , are considered as the essential components of practical arguments, while the second triad, qualifier , backing , and rebuttal ...
First of all, Hilary Putnam, by tracing back the quarrel to Hume's dictum, claims fact/value entanglement as an objection, since the distinction between them entails a value. [ clarification needed ] A. N. Prior points out, from the statement "He is a sea captain," it logically follows, "He ought to do what a sea captain ought to do."
The claim that all assertions are provisional and thus open to revision in light of new evidence is widely taken for granted in the natural sciences. [12] Furthermore, Popper defended his critical rationalism as a normative and methodological theory, that explains how objective, and thus mind-independent, knowledge ought to work. [13]