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 Belief in other minds can be justified by extrapolating from one's own case via correlation between mental states and behaviour
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
2 perspectives
Reason for 1 of 2
?
1.
Inductive inference from a single case (oneself) to all other minds violates the logical requirement of a sufficiently large and varied sample.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
The argument assumes the very regularity it seeks to establish: that mental-behavioural correlations in one being generalize across numerically distinct beings.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reason for 2 of 2
?
1.
Wittgenstein's private language argument establishes that mental state concepts are themselves constituted by public, behavioural criteria, making introspective 'knowledge of one's own case' already theory-laden.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If the basis of the analogy (privileged first-person access to pure mental states) is incoherent, the analogical inference collapses before it can begin.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
I know that certain of my mental states are correlated with certain pieces of behaviour
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Others exhibit similar behaviour to my own
?
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.