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 Daniel Dennett's 'intuition pump' critique entails that all destructive thought experiments operate by the same mechanism: redirecting intuitions rather than through distinct logical operations.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Some thought experiments (Gettier cases) function by identifying logical gaps in definitions, not by deploying vivid scenarios or redirecting intuitions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Dennett's critique targets *persuasive* mechanisms, not *logical* ones—two thought experiments can operate identically in intuition-pumping while using distinct logical structures.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Showing that intuitions vary across variants doesn't prove intuition-redirection is the only mechanism; it could show formalization merely obscures valid logical differences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Dennett demonstrates that famous thought experiments (Searle's Chinese Room, Jackson's Mary) work by making scenarios vivid rather than logically rigorous.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If thought experiments relied on distinct logical operations, their conclusions would survive formalization into explicit premises without loss of persuasive force.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The fact that variants of thought experiments (different Mary scenarios) reverse intuitions suggests mechanism is intuitive appeal, not formal logical structure.
      ?

      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.