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 I can represent the identity of the apperceiving subject indirectly by apprehending a unity or ordering among my representations

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Unity among representations could be produced by associative mechanisms requiring no persisting subject, as Hume's bundle theory demonstrates.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Inferring a identical subject from representational unity commits the fallacy Kant himself identifies: treating a logical unity as a substantial self.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Representational unity is a relational property of mental states, not a mark of the subject who bears them, leaving the subject's identity underdetermined.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Parfit's reductionism shows that what matters in personal identity can be fully specified by psychological continuity relations without positing a unified apperceiving subject at all.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.If the representations I can attribute to myself possess a unity of the right kind, then apprehending that unity allows me to represent the apperceiving subject of any one of them as identical with that of any other
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.I can be cognitively sensitive to features of my representations, including their unity or ordering
      ?

      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.