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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that A fact about B-location cannot entail a mind-dependent A-determination without smuggling in a privileged observer.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.B-locations and A-determinations may both be relational properties; neither requires absolute observer-independence, so no smuggling occurs.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Mind-dependent properties can follow from facts about physical structure via universal psychophysical laws, without privileging particular observers.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The claim conflates 'involving minds' with 'requiring a privileged observer'—many mind-dependent truths are universally accessible to all observers.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.B-locations are objective spatiotemporal facts independent of observers; A-determinations involve perspective-dependent properties like color.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Any inference from objective facts to mind-dependent properties requires a bridge principle that privileges some observer's perspective as canonical.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Without such privileging, multiple incompatible A-determinations follow from the same B-location, making the entailment logically invalid.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42