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's own existence serves as a foundational truth from which a broader search for knowledge can proceed

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The cogito establishes only a momentary, fleeting mental event, not a persistent substantial self capable of grounding further inquiry.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Hume's bundle theory demonstrates that 'I' denotes no unified substance but merely a succession of perceptions with no stable foundation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A foundational truth requires permanence and identity over time, which the bare act of thinking cannot itself supply.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Lichtenberg argued the cogito is over-stated: the datum licenses only 'there is thinking occurring,' not 'I exist as a thinking thing.'
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Inferring a substantial ego from the occurrence of thought smuggles in a pre-critical metaphysical assumption that the method of doubt should have suspended.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Innate reason, applied consistently, leads to the affirmation of Descartes's own existence
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A disinclination toward perversity means one cannot reasonably deny what consistent reason affirms
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Descartes's existence, once established, provides a starting point for further rational inquiry
      ?

      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.