A circular inference cannot ground ontologicalconclusions: using sense-experience to validate the causal principle that licenses inference from sensa to matter begs the very question at issue.
?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.
Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.
circular inference(as used in logic and argumentation)
A logical mistake where you use something as proof for itself—like saying 'the Bible is true because the Bible says so.' You're going in circles instead of building a real argument.
matter(Kant's critical epistemology, agreeing with Leibniz on this point)
Not a thing in itself with mind-independent characteristics, but an appearance — objects as presented to human perception, characterized by shape, contact, and movement.
sensa(NE §373)
Percepta given by means of the sense organs of the body, as distinguished from mental states or spiritual data given by introspection