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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Indivisible atoms in combination cannot be the object of cognition

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • Atoms conceived as indivisible units in combination cannot be proved to exist as indivisible
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Dignāga's epistemology holds that cognition requires a causal form-imprint (ākāra) from its object, which composites cannot uniformly produce.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A combination of atoms presents no single unified causal surface capable of generating one determinate perceptual representation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore the composite, not any indivisible unit, bears the epistemic load, undermining atomism's explanatory role in perception.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Vasubandhu argues in the Viṃśikā that spatial contact between truly partless atoms is geometrically impossible without introducing directionality, hence division.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Any object that cannot achieve genuine contact cannot aggregate into a perceptible whole that preserves original indivisibility.
      ?

      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.
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42