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
    If 'things in themselves' cannot coherently be described ... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Things in themselves—objects considered qua objects of discursive cognition in general—are not in space.

    If 'things in themselves' cannot coherently be described as existing, claims about their spatial or non-spatial character are equally meaningless rather than informatively negative.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Predicates like 'spatial' and 'non-spatial' presuppose a framework of intelligibility; applying them to the unknowable violates their logical preconditions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If a thing cannot be coherently described as existing, we lack the conceptual ground to assign it any determinate properties whatsoever.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Saying 'things-in-themselves are non-spatial' smuggles in content where only silence is justified by the premises.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.A statement can be meaningfully negative without presupposing full coherent description: 'not spatial' genuinely excludes something even if existence remains unclear.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The claim conflates semantic meaningfulness with metaphysical coherence; denying spatial properties conveys substantive information regardless of ontological puzzles.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Things-in-themselves might be coherently *described* as non-spatial even if their existence mode differs from phenomena, making the claim's dichotomy false.
      ?

      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.

    Key Terms

    Coherently(as describing how these functions work together)
    In a way that is logically consistent and doesn't contradict itself.
    Ontology(Carnap argues this enterprise is based on a mistake)
    The philosophical discipline that tries to answer hard questions about what there really is.
    informatively negative(logic and language)
    A statement that tells us something by saying what something is NOT—for example, 'this wall is not blue' gives us actual information.
    meaningless(philosophy of language)
    A statement or claim that has no real content or significance—it doesn't actually tell us anything true or false.
    spatial(metaphysics)
    Having to do with space—existing in a location or having size, shape, or position.
    things in themselves(Kant's critical system)
    Entities posited as existing independently of human representation, distinct from appearances

    Connections

    2 topics

    Modality & Possibility1 linkedPerception1 linked

    Related

    A statement can be meaningfully negative without presupposing full coherent desc...If a thing cannot be coherently described as existing, we lack the conceptual gr...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit
    Predicates like 'spatial' and 'non-spatial' presuppose a framework of intelligib...
    Saying 'things-in-themselves are non-spatial' smuggles in content where only sil...
    +3 moreShow less
    The claim conflates semantic meaningfulness with metaphysical coherence; denying...Things in themselves—objects considered qua objects of discursive cognition in g...Things-in-themselves might be coherently *described* as non-spatial even if thei...