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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that A secret as such does not exist; every secret is necessarily shared.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Wittgenstein's private language argument establishes that internal representations require public criteria, but this does not collapse the distinction between what is shareable in principle and what is actually shared.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A potential for sharing is ontologically distinct from actual sharing: a locked manuscript shared with no one remains unshared despite being written in a public language.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The Derridean slide from 'in principle shareable' to 'always already shared' commits a modal fallacy, confusing possibility with actuality in a way that would also dissolve meaningful distinctions like public/private and disclosure/concealment.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kierkegaard's account of Abraham in 'Fear and Trembling' demonstrates an absolute secret grounded not in linguistic structure but in an incommensurable singular relation to the divine that resists all mediation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If a secret's content exceeds any available representational or linguistic form—as in ineffable religious experience or qualia—then the premise that forming a representation requires a shareable trace fails to apply universally.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Levinas similarly insists that the alterity of the Other is never fully constituted through shared semiotic systems, suggesting interiority can harbor genuine opacity irreducible to the logic of the trace.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.To genuinely possess a secret, one must tell it to oneself, forming an internal representation of it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Forming a representation of the secret requires a trace or name, which is in principle shareable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If the secret must necessarily be shareable, it is always already shared.
      ?

      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.