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
    Content compatibilism holds that both privileged access a... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Content compatibilism is false — privileged access and content externalism cannot both be true simultaneously.

    Content compatibilism holds that both privileged access and content externalism are true.

    Consciousness & MindPhilosophy of Language
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Philosophy of LanguageConsciousness & Mind

    Related

    Content compatibilism is false — privileged access and content externalism canno...Privileged access and content externalism together entail a contradiction (reduc...

    Similar

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Philosophy of Language
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Content compatibilism is false — privileged access and content externa...96%Unrestricted privileged access (covering wide/externally-individuated ...83%Having a priori knowledge of externalist thought contents requires tha...80%Those who endorse content externalism should endorse only a restricted...80%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: skepticism-content-externalism
    View source passageHide passage
    I take this argument to be a reductio of content compatibilism: one of these two principles, privileged access and content externalism, must be false. One who endorses content externalism should I think endorse a restricted form of privileged access on which we can have privileged access only to the narrow contents of our thoughts (see McKinsey 2002).

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective