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
    Humans cannot gain any true knowledge — Carmelics
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Humans cannot gain any true knowledge

    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.Knowledge is infinite
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The human capacity for comprehension is too limited to grasp infinite knowledge
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Zhuangzi's perspectivalism entails that partial, situated knowledge is genuine knowledge, not a failed approximation of absolute knowledge.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If finite knowers can reliably navigate the world through dao-aligned practice, then functional truth-tracking constitutes a valid form of knowing.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The argument conflates exhaustive knowledge of all things with true knowledge of particular things, an equivocation on 'knowledge'.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Wang Yangming's doctrine of liangzhi demonstrates that moral and perceptual knowledge can be certain without requiring infinite comprehension.
      ?

      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

    Key Terms

    knowledge(Distinguished from mere true belief, which may be the product of indoctrination and need not exercise deliberative capacities.)
    Justified true belief — true belief that has been arrived at through the exercise of deliberative capacities, including comparison of and deliberation among alternatives.

    Related

    If finite knowers can reliably navigate the world through dao-aligned practice, ...Knowledge is infiniteThe argument conflates exhaustive knowledge of all things with true knowledge of...The human capacity for comprehension is too limited to grasp infinite knowledge
    +2 moreShow less
    Wang Yangming's doctrine of liangzhi demonstrates that moral and perceptual know...Zhuangzi's perspectivalism entails that partial, situated knowledge is genuine k...

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: chinese-epistemology
    View source passageHide passage
    Although the Neo-Mohists were never able to formulate an exhaustive response to Hui Shi’s radical relativism, his contemporary Zhuangzi (4th century BC) clearly found it to be an important stimulus for his own thought, and was definitely influenced by him when elaborating his own epistemological system. Zhuangzi believed that because knowledge was infinite, the human capacity for comprehension was too limited to enable us to gain any true knowledge (Zhuangzi CTP: Yang sheng zhu, 1). Thus, he bel
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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