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
    A judgment of experience has objective validity. — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Perception
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    A judgment of experience has objective validity.

    PerceptionTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.A judgment of experience is a judgment that has been given a relation to an object.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Any judgment related to an object is intended to be valid at all times and for everyone.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Necessary universal validity constitutes objective validity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kant's categories of understanding are constitutive of experience only for beings with our cognitive architecture, not universally for all possible minds.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If objective validity depends on necessary universal validity, and that necessity is anthropocentric, then 'objective' validity is covertly species-relative.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Hume's bundle theory entails that causal necessity is a habit of mind projected onto constant conjunctions, not discovered in objects themselves.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the relation to an object in a judgment of experience is grounded in projected necessity rather than mind-independent structure, the judgment tracks psychological compulsion, not objectivity.
      ?

      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.

    Topics

    PerceptionTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    2 topics

    Philosophy of Language2 linkedModality & Possibility1 linked

    Related

    A judgment of experience is a judgment that has been given a relation to an obje...Any judgment related to an object is intended to be valid at all times and for e...Hume's bundle theory entails that causal necessity is a habit of mind projected ...If objective validity depends on necessary universal validity, and that necessit...
    +3 moreShow less
    If the relation to an object in a judgment of experience is grounded in projecte...Kant's categories of understanding are constitutive of experience only for being...Necessary universal validity constitutes objective validity.

    Similar

    Objective validity of a judgment of experience is equivalent to its ne...89%Conceptualizing experience as involving an objective order and arrange...86%A judgment of experience is a judgment that has been given a relation ...86%Making objectively valid judgments about experience implies that exper...85%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: kant-hume-causality
    View source passageHide passage
    Empirical judgments, in so far as they have objective validity, are judgments of experience; they, however, in so far as they are only subjectively valid, I call mere judgments of perception. … All of our judgments are at first mere judgments of perception: they are valid merely for us, i.e., for our subject, and only afterwards do we give them a new relation, namely to an object, and we intend that [the judgment] is supposed to be also valid for us at all times and precisely so for everyone els
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit