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 Human cognition cannot access things as they are in themselves, regardless of the number or type of sense faculties possessed.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Some cognitive access is constitutively non-representational: in direct realist accounts (Reid, Putnam), perception is not a veil but a relation to the object itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If perception is a genuine relation to external objects rather than a representation of them, the mediating act does not entail that only phenomenal knowledge results.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The inference from 'all cognition is mediated' to 'all cognition yields only phenomenal knowledge' presupposes a representationalist model of perception that direct realism rejects.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kant's own framework permits synthetic a priori knowledge of structural features (causality, space, time) that are necessarily instantiated in any possible experience, grounding objective validity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If cognitive structures are constitutive of the objects of possible experience rather than merely subjective filters, the phenomenal/noumenal gap does not preclude genuine knowledge of objective structure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Cassirer and neo-Kantians argue that structural or relational knowledge (as in mathematical physics) counts as knowledge of reality, not merely of appearances, undermining the claim's absolutism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.All cognition in any sentient creature must be mediated by some method of cognizing.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Any new method of cognizing would still yield only phenomenal knowledge, not knowledge of things as they are in themselves.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Even if humans acquired extra sense faculties or new ways of perceiving, knowledge gained would remain 'merely phenomenal'.
      ?

      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.