Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    A concept of 'seeing movement' that conflates perceptual ... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Ordinary talk of 'seeing' things move is intelligible on its own terms.

    A concept of 'seeing movement' that conflates perceptual presence with memorial retention is not intelligible on its own terms but equivocates between distinct cognitive acts.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Perception presents objects as immediately present; memory represents past states. Conflating them violates the basic phenomenological distinction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If 'seeing movement' requires both instantaneous perception and retained prior positions, it smuggles memorial content into a perceptual claim.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Equivocation between distinct acts undermines the intelligibility of any unified concept that fails to acknowledge their categorical difference.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.All perception integrates immediate sensory input with short-term retention; this integration need not be an equivocation but constitutes unified experience.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The act of 'seeing movement' may be a single cognitive achievement that legitimately depends on both present perception and retained information without incoherence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Distinguishing cognitive components does not entail they cannot be rationally unified under one concept; chemistry unifies physics without equivocating.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Perception1 linkedPhilosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    All perception integrates immediate sensory input with short-term retention; thi...Distinguishing cognitive components does not entail they cannot be rationally un...Equivocation between distinct acts undermines the intelligibility of any unified...If 'seeing movement' requires both instantaneous perception and retained prior p...
    +3 moreShow less
    Ordinary talk of 'seeing' things move is intelligible on its own terms.Perception presents objects as immediately present; memory represents past state...The act of 'seeing movement' may be a single cognitive achievement that legitima...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit