In Defense of Comparability: Reply to Carlson and Risberg

ABSTRACT 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.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Noûs
Published
2026-03-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/nous.70040
Primary Topic
Philosophy and Theoretical Science
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

In Defense of Comparability: Reply to Carlson and Risberg

Jacob M. Nebel, Cian Dorr, Jake Zuehl
Noûs
Philosophy and Theoretical Science
article

In Defense of Comparability: Reply to Carlson and Risberg

Jacob M. Nebel, Cian Dorr, Jake Zuehl
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT 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.

Noûs
University of Miami (US), Princeton University (US), New York University (US)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 29%
Philosophy and Theoretical Science
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.