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 succession of experiences is not the same as an experience of succession.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Hume's bundle theory holds that the self is nothing but a bundle of successive perceptions with no additional unifying subject.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If Hume is correct, then a succession of experiences just is what experience of succession consists in, with no further diachronic co-consciousness required.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The supporting argument's demand for a single co-conscious episode smuggles in a Kantian unified subject that bundle theorists explicitly reject.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.William James's stream of consciousness doctrine holds that each momentary experience already contains 'fringe' retentional and protentional content of adjacent moments.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If temporal relations are intrinsically encoded within each discrete experience as James argues, then a well-structured succession of experiences itself constitutes an experience of succession.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The claim therefore presents a false dichotomy by assuming succession and experience-of-succession require categorically distinct metaphysical structures.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Tones D and E are heard in order — D is heard first, then E — constituting a succession of experiences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.However, because D and E are not diachronically co-conscious, there is no single experiential state in which the transition from D to E is presented.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Being experienced as a succession requires the successive contents to be jointly present within a single diachronically co-conscious episode.
      ?

      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.