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 Idealism cannot be shown to be superior to realism, dogmatism, or materialism on rational grounds alone.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The concept of a 'Subject-Object' — a whole prior to and constitutive of its elements — cannot be defended by rational means.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Without a rational basis for the 'Subject-Object', there is no rational way to decide which of idealism and its opposites is to be favored over the other.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Both idealism and dogmatism have the status of mere proclamations or assurances, making them equipollent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kant's 'Critique of Pure Reason' demonstrates that both idealism and realism rest on transcendental assumptions that precede and condition rational justification itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the very categories through which we assess rational superiority are themselves products of the idealist-realist dispute, no neutral rational tribunal can adjudicate between them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Fichte's recognition that the Wissenschaftslehre's founding posit of the absolute 'I' requires intellectual intuition rather than discursive proof confirms that idealism's ground is pre-rational.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Agrippan trilemma-style regress arguments, as developed by Sextus Empiricus and revived in Neurath and Quine, show that any foundational metaphysical commitment terminates in brute assertion rather than demonstration.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Sellars's critique of the 'Myth of the Given' establishes that neither mind-dependent nor mind-independent starting points can be derived from experience without presupposing the very framework under dispute.
      ?

      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.