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 Even if no thinking being existed, there would still be at least one 'truth in itself'.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.A proposition that is true in a world with no thinking beings cannot be evaluated for truth without invoking a perspective external to that world.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The supporting argument smuggles in a covert evaluator: we, as thinking beings, judge the counterfactual scenario, making the 'truth in itself' observer-dependent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore the argument is self-undermining: it requires minds to establish the existence of mind-independent truth.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.For Wittgenstein and deflationary truth theorists, 'P is true' adds nothing beyond asserting P, so 'truth' is a logical device within language, not a metaphysical realm.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Language and propositions are social-institutional practices that presuppose communities of language users, making propositions ontologically dependent on minded beings.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Bolzano's 'truths in itself' therefore posit a spurious third realm that conflates the logical grammar of truth-talk with a substantive metaphysical claim about mind-independent entities.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.If no thinking being existed, the proposition 'There exists no thinking being' would be true.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.That true proposition could not be known or held by any thinking being (since none would exist).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore it would be a 'truth in itself' — a true proposition independent of any mind.
      ?

      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.