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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Berkeley's master argument conflates the content of a proposition with the act of entertaining that proposition.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.A proposition such as 'The earth may still exist after the extinction of all conscious life' has a content distinct from the act of thinking it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The act of entertaining a proposition requires a conscious being, but the content of the proposition need not refer to conscious beings.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Berkeley treats the act of conceiving as evidence that the object conceived must be mind-dependent, ignoring this content/act distinction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Philosophy of Language
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42