Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Assigning propositional content a sui generis cognitive function structurally parallels Fregean Gedanken, which are real without being physical or mental.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Attributing sui generis cognitive functions risks explanatory circularity without reducing to physical or mental mechanisms.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
The Fregean parallel conflates mathematical abstraction with genuine ontological commitment to non-physical, non-mental entities.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Internalist semantics adequately explains propositional content through representational states without invoking abstract objects.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Propositional content exhibits abstract structure independent of any single mind, paralleling Frege's Gedanken as mind-independent entities.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
The sui generis function of propositions (determining truth conditions) requires ontological status beyond physical or mental properties.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Multiple agents can grasp identical propositions, suggesting a shared abstract object rather than private mental states.
?
How convincing is this?
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.