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 unified whole cannot be the object of cognition — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    A unified whole cannot be the object of cognition

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Cognition operates by discriminating features, boundaries, and distinctions, which presupposes decomposition rather than holistic unity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Dignāga's apoha theory shows that conceptual cognition grasps objects only through exclusion of otherness, never through positive unified wholes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A genuinely unified whole would have no internal distinctions for cognitive faculties to latch onto, making it epistemically inert.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Vasubandhu's Abhidharma analysis demonstrates that what appears as a unified whole—a chariot, a person—dissolves under analysis into discrete dharmas.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the unified whole were a real object of cognition, its removal would alter the cognitive content, but cognition survives elimination of the posited unity intact.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • Nowhere is an external object grasped as a unity or whole apart from its parts
      ?

      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

    SkepticismPerception

    Related

    A genuinely unified whole would have no internal distinctions for cognitive facu...Cognition operates by discriminating features, boundaries, and distinctions, whi...Dignāga's apoha theory shows that conceptual cognition grasps objects only throu...If the unified whole were a real object of cognition, its removal would alter th...
    +2 moreShow less
    Nowhere is an external object grasped as a unity or whole apart from its partsVasubandhu's Abhidharma analysis demonstrates that what appears as a unified who...

    Similar

    A unified whole is not grasped as such apart from its parts84%An external sense-object cannot be the intentional object of cognition...83%No external object — whether conceived as a unified whole, as loose co...82%Indivisible atoms in combination cannot be the object of cognition81%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: twotruths-india
    View source passageHide passage
    Of the three alternatives: (1) points to the unity of a thing conceived as a whole; and (2) and (3) point to the multiplicity looking at the things as loose atoms, i.e., composite atoms. Not one of the three possibilities is, on Yogācāra’s account, admissible as the object of cognition however. The first is inadmissible because nowhere an external object is grasped as a unity, whole, one apart from its parts ([ĀlamPV] Tshad ma ce 86b). The second is inadmissible because when we see things we fin
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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