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 unitary enduring self must exist as the subject that unifies cross-modal perceptual judgements.

    ?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 demonstrates that introspection reveals only discrete perceptual states, never a unitary subject that owns them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The unifying function attributed to a permanent self can be fully accounted for by causal and associative relations among mental states themselves.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Positing a substantial self as unifier violates parsimony, since no explanatory work requires it beyond what bundled states with functional connections already provide.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Vasubandhu's Abhidharma analysis shows cross-modal synthesis arises from sequential mental events in a causal stream, requiring no enduring owner.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The Nyāya inference from 'judgement must inhere in a substance' to 'that substance is a permanent self' illicitly assumes the Vaiśeṣika category scheme rather than establishing it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.It is possible to make trans-modality judgements that compare the deliverances of different sense-faculties (e.g., judging that a visually perceived object and a tactilely perceived object are identical).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A trans-modality judgement of the form 'the visually perceived object equals the tactilely perceived object' does not belong to the sphere of any single sense-faculty.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Any judgement must be located in some substance; if it cannot be located in any single sense-faculty, it must be located in another substance.
      ?

      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.