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 Cognition occurs only when consciously attending to a given object, not merely when object, sense faculty, and consciousness are co-present.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Subliminal or preattentive perceptual processing demonstrably influences behavior and downstream cognition without conscious attention, as shown in Leibniz's petites perceptions and contemporary masked priming research.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If unattended sensory states causally structure conscious experience, they must themselves constitute a form of cognition, not mere inert physical events.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The Buddhist claim conflates cognition with reportable awareness, an unjustifiably narrow criterion that excludes functionally cognitive states from the mental domain.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The Mimamsa and Nyaya schools held that a valid perceptual episode (pratyaksha) arises from contact between sense organ and object prior to and independent of voluntary attentional direction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Attention on the Nyaya account is a subsequent act of manas that discriminates and names an already-arising cognition, not a condition for the cognition's initial occurrence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If attention were constitutive rather than selective, the Yogacara conflates the conditions for cognition's genesis with the conditions for its conceptual elaboration, committing a genetic fallacy.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The mere coming together of object, sense faculty, and consciousness is not sufficient for a cognitive event to arise.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Sense data becomes a concrete object of apprehension only when attention is directed toward specific regions of the perceptual field.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.In normal circumstances, the senses process a steady and continuous stream of sensory impressions without each impression becoming a cognized object.
      ?

      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.