← back to claim Circular Reasoning Is Valid

evidence graph

cited by (1)
[+0] Circular Reasoning Works discuss [i]
Circular Reasoning Is Valid
supports (1)
[+0] Circular Reasoning Works discuss [i] 1 more
1 more — see its evidence
1 claim beyond depth 1 not shown — [go deeper] depth 1 2 3 both pro con
what the marks mean
  • supports · opposes · cites this claim · the claim you are reading
  • [+9] net votes on the evidence link — whether this is good evidence here, not whether the claim itself is true
  • Af··· accurate, falsifiable, clear, novel, important — a capital is established, lowercase weak, unrated; no strip at all where nothing has been rated yet
  • [?] no score has been computed for that claim yet
  • field shown only where a claim's fields differ from the one above it, so a field marks where the argument crosses into another
inspector

Select a link’s marker to see who asserted it, why, and what it cites.