Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Differing cognitive states across engagements constitute a form of change even if no temporal succession underlies them.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Change traditionally means one state transitioning to another, requiring temporal ordering to be meaningful.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Different cognitive states across engagements are separate events occurring at different times, undermining the claim.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Calling achronic differences 'change' equivocates on the term and obscures rather than clarifies the phenomenon.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Change requires only a difference between states, not temporal succession between them.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Cognitive states at different engagements are genuinely distinct mental configurations, not identical.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Mathematical objects exhibit structural differences without time; cognition may similarly be atemporal.
?
How convincing is this?
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.
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42