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 An entity that persists identically across distinct acts of thinking cannot itself be nothing other than any particular act of thinking.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The notion of a 'persistent substrate' independent of all acts may be incoherent; identity could emerge from continuity patterns among acts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The claim conflates 'being nothing other than' with 'being identical to'; an entity can be constituted by acts without reducing to any single act.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Empirically, no direct access to an entity 'apart from' thinking exists; positing such an entity explains nothing beyond the continuity we observe.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Identity requires a substrate that remains constant while properties change; distinct acts of thinking are events, not persistent substrates.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If X is identical to Y, then X and Y share all properties; acts of thinking have different temporal properties, so no act equals the thinker.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A unified subject of experience must transcend any single experience; otherwise discontinuous thoughts couldn't belong to one entity.
      ?

      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.