Non-Empirical Criticism

Non-empirical criticism is criticism that doesn't depend on sense observation — it works by logic, mathematics, or conceptual analysis. CR and CF both rely on it heavily.

Examples

• Logical inconsistency. "Your premises contradict each other."
• Mathematical error. "Your formula doesn't balance."
• Definitional incoherence. "Your terms can't all mean what you say."
• Universal premise + counter-example. Pure logic.
• Regress argument. Pure meta-reasoning.

Why it matters

• Empiricism alone is self-refuting. See strong-empiricism.
• Most real criticism is non-empirical. Errors in reasoning are caught by reasoning.
• Yes/No philosophy is non-empirical. It doesn't depend on data.

CF's use

CF uses non-empirical criticism for:

• IGC evaluation. "Your idea can't work because of how goals and contexts interact."
• Decision-making math. "Dimensions don't add."
• Criticism of credences. "Regress attacks any justification of priors."
• Criticism of induction. Logical asymmetry.

Limits

• Non-empirical criticism can't prove empirical claims. It can show logical structure, not fact.
• Some claims are pure convention. They yield to non-empirical criticism.

"Non-empirical criticism" is one of CF's enumerated CR-specific concepts. — criticalfallibilism.com