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
    False belief is impossible because one cannot believe wha... — Carmelics
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    False belief is impossible because one cannot believe what is not the case

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.To believe falsely is to believe what is not — i.e., a nonentity
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Just as one cannot perceive a nonentity, one cannot believe a nonentity either
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.There is no such thing as what is not the case; it is a mere nonentity
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Belief is a propositional attitude directed at structured states of affairs, not bare objects or nonentities.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A false belief like 'Theaetetus flies' refers to real constituents (Theaetetus, flying) combined in a false arrangement, not to nothing.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The falsity consists in the mismatch between propositional structure and the world, not in believing a nonexistent object.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Plato's own wax-tablet model in the Theaetetus shows false belief arises from misidentification between memory imprints and perceptions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Mismatching two genuine entities — e.g., believing Theaetetus is Theodorus — involves only existents, yet yields falsehood.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.This refutes the claim on its own terms: false belief need not invoke nonbeing at all, only mistaken relational pairing of real things.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Perception1 linked

    Related

    A false belief like 'Theaetetus flies' refers to real constituents (Theaetetus, ...Belief is a propositional attitude directed at structured states of affairs, not...Just as one cannot perceive a nonentity, one cannot believe a nonentity eitherMismatching two genuine entities — e.g., believing Theaetetus is Theodorus — inv...
    +5 moreShow less
    Plato's own wax-tablet model in the Theaetetus shows false belief arises from mi...The falsity consists in the mismatch between propositional structure and the wor...There is no such thing as what is not the case; it is a mere nonentityThis refutes the claim on its own terms: false belief need not invoke nonbeing a...To believe falsely is to believe what is not — i.e., a nonentity

    Similar

    It is impossible for the belief 'F, but my overall evidence does not s...86%Contradictory beliefs cannot both be true85%One cannot simply will a belief into existence, especially when one kn...84%Smith and Ramirez cannot believe the same proposition because one beli...83%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: plato-theaetetus
    View source passageHide passage
    Some think the Second Puzzle a mere sophistry. Bostock 1988: 165 distinguishes two versions of the sophistry: “On one version, to believe falsely is… to believe what is not ‘just by itself’; on the other version, it is to believe what is not ‘about one of the things which are’”. The argument of the first version, according to Bostock, “is just that there is no such thing as what is not (the case); it is a mere nonentity. But just as you cannot perceive a nonentity, so equally you cannot believe
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit