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 I demonstrably employ coherent mental concepts, so the precondition of other minds must be satisfied.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Coherent concepts could be internally generated or evolutionarily determined; they don't logically require other currently-existing minds.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
My demonstrable concept-use establishes my mind's existence, but provides no empirical evidence distinguishing simulated from real others.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Inferring other minds from my own cognition commits the analogical argument fallacy: one case is insufficient for inductive generalization.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Coherent mental concepts require learned social frameworks that could only arise through interaction with other minds.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
The reliability of my reasoning about abstract concepts suggests their grounding in shared intersubjective reality, not solipsism.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Self-awareness itself requires a distinctions between self and other, logically presupposing the conceptual possibility of other minds.
?
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.