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 Descartes distinguishes formal reality (the act of thinking) from objective reality (the represented content), and a mode of mind possesses only formal, not intrinsic objective, reality.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.If objective reality is merely represented content without intrinsic reality, we cannot explain how ideas can be about real external objects at all.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The distinction between formal and objective reality seems to rely on an unexplained difference in what 'reality' means in each context.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Modes of mind like pain or desire appear to have intrinsic reality as experienced qualitative states, not merely representational content.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Thinking acts are events occurring in the mind with causal power; represented content exists only as objects of thought, not independently.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A mode of mind (e.g., perceiving redness) has real existence as a mental act, but the redness itself exists only as an idea, not intrinsically.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.This distinction preserves the causal efficacy of mental acts while avoiding the problem of how mind-independent objects could exist inside thought.
      ?

      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.