In Defense of Comparability
Reply to Carlson and Risberg
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21364051 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Cian Dorr (New York University, New York New York USA, corresponding author), Jacob M Nebel (0000-0002-1813-0351, Princeton University Princeton New Jersey USA, corresponding author), Jake Zuehl (University of Miami Coral Gables Florida USA, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2026 |
| Publication date | 2026-03-11 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Noûs (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0029-4624 • E-ISSN: 1468-0068 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/nous.70040 |
| OpenAlex | W7135043364 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 10 |
In “The Case for Comparability,” we argue that every comparative expression “” obeys Comparability: if two things are at least as as themselves, then one of them must be at least as as the other. One of our arguments appeals to the apparent validity of the Strong Monotonicity schema: is ; is not ; so, is more than . In a recent reply to our paper, Erik Carlson and Olle Risberg claim that this argument is not valid, that it begs the question, and that the appearances favoring Strong Monotonicity—at least, for the adjective “good”—can be explained away. This paper defends our argument against these objections
Adjective · Ambiguity · Argument (complex analysis) · Criticism · Expression (computer science) · Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics · Philosophical Ethics and Theory · Philosophy and Theoretical Science
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |