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 infinite regress fallacy does not arise for witnessing consciousness even though consciousness cannot become its own object

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Self-luminosity claims face a structural dilemma: either consciousness knows itself by a cognitive act, generating regress, or it does not know itself at all.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Dharmakīrti and the Buddhist epistemologists argued that svasaṃvedana (self-awareness) must still be a reflexive cognition, which reintroduces the act/object distinction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If the witness is genuinely objectless, it cannot discriminate its own presence from absence, making self-establishment epistemically vacuous.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Higher-order thought theories (Rosenthal) hold that a mental state is conscious only when accompanied by a suitable higher-order representation of it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A witness consciousness that requires no higher-order cognition cannot account for the phenomenal difference between conscious and unconscious mental states.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Exempting witnessing consciousness from the regress by fiat is an ad hoc move that privileges one cognitive level without principled justification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Consciousness does not require a second, subsequent, or higher-order cognition to reveal itself
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The witness is self-established and needs no external apprehension
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Only a theory requiring further cognitions to illumine prior cognitions generates a regress
      ?

      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.