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 similar, less-than-deductive criterion should suffice for explaining how consciousness might be caused or realized by nonconscious items

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Economic properties lack intrinsic qualitative character, while phenomenal consciousness essentially involves subjective 'what it is like' properties.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The explanatory gap for qualia is not merely epistemic but ontological: no functional story explains why physical processes produce experience rather than nothing.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Chalmers' hard problem demonstrates that the economic analogy fails precisely because consciousness resists third-person functional characterization.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Levine's explanatory gap argument shows that even a complete causal-functional account of consciousness leaves the qualitative character unexplained in principle.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A 'less-than-deductive' standard is acceptable only when residual gaps are attributable to complexity, not to a categorical difference in the explanandum's nature.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.In the economic case, a general and less-than-deductive understanding of how economic properties are underlain by physical ones is accepted as adequate
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The explanatory situation for consciousness and nonconscious physical items is analogous to the economic-physical case
      ?

      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.