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 False impressions that are subjectively indiscernible from cognitive impressions do not show that there are no cognitive impressions.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.If two impressions are subjectively indiscernible, no internal criterion can reliably distinguish the cognitive from the non-cognitive.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A criterion of truth that cannot be applied in practice by the cognizing subject fails its epistemic function.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The Stoic cognitive impression was introduced precisely as a practical criterion for when assent is epistemically warranted.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Arcesilaus's challenge, preserved in Sextus Empiricus, is that indiscernibility of false impressions collapses the cognitive impression into a mere externalist definition with no action-guiding force.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A definition of knowledge that divorces subjective access from epistemic warrant cannot ground the Stoic practical ideal of the sage who withholds assent from non-cognitive impressions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The Stoic definition of a cognitive impression does not require that cognitive impressions be subjectively distinguishable from false impressions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The existence of indiscernible false impressions only challenges cognitive impressions if the definition requires subjective distinguishability.
      ?

      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.