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 Epiphenomenalism is implausible

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Epiphenomenalism entails that pains, visual sensations, and conscious understanding have nothing directly to do with how a person responds behaviorally
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.It is counterintuitive to deny that a pain caused by being hit influences one's response, that visual sensation of a lion influences one's flight response, or that conscious understanding influences one's reaction to an argument
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Huxley's 'steam whistle' analogy shows that systematic correlation between mental states and behavior is fully explicable without causal efficacy of consciousness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Neural correlates of consciousness studies (Crick & Koch) demonstrate that all behavioral outputs are fully determined by physical brain processes prior to conscious awareness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If physical processes causally sufficient for behavior already exist, positing additional mental causation violates the causal closure of physics and generates overdetermination.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Libet's experiments showing neural readiness potentials precede conscious intentions by ~550ms entail that consciousness tracks rather than initiates behavioral decisions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A theory that aligns with empirical neuroscience findings on the temporal sequence of neural and conscious events is more scientifically credible than one that contradicts them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The counterintuitiveness of denying mental causation is itself explicable as an illusion of control documented in Wegner's 'The Illusion of Conscious Will' (2002).
      ?

      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.