Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Goodman's finite differentiation requires that differences between characters be perceivable in principle, not merely measurable by instruments.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Perceivability varies by observer acuity; privileging human perception arbitrarily excludes valid symbolic systems accessible to others.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Modern science regularly uses distinctions (quantum states, isotopes) measurable but not perceivable; these are genuinely consequential.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Restricting differences to perceivable ones may exclude legitimate notational refinements that serve mathematical or technical purposes.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Symbols function through conventional use; if differences aren't perceivable, users cannot distinguish notational variants in practice.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Instrument-only differences risk infinite proliferation of imperceptible distinctions, collapsing meaningful notational constraints.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Goodman's project concerns how symbols actually work cognitively; imperceptible differences are epistemically inert for users.
?
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.