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
    Levin's reply to McGinn's phenomenological problem relies... — Carmelics
    Home/Perception
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Levin's reply to McGinn's phenomenological problem relies on scrutinizing the assumptions that underpin McGinn's criticism

    Consciousness & MindPerception
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.McGinn's argument against dispositionalism rests on specific assumptions
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The doctrine of Revelation is relevant to evaluating those assumptions
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.McGinn's phenomenological argument does not depend on Revelation but on the intrinsic qualitative character of color experience itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Scrutinizing assumptions about Revelation leaves intact the core intuition that dispositional properties cannot fully capture phenomenal redness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Levin's strategy of rejecting Revelation is itself controversial, as Johnston and others argue Revelation captures a genuine datum about color phenomenology.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A reply that works only by denying a widely-held phenomenological principle fails to engage dispositionalism's opponents on their own terms.
      ?

      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.

    Topics

    PerceptionConsciousness & Mind

    Connections

    1 topic

    Truth & Knowledge1 linked

    Related

    A reply that works only by denying a widely-held phenomenological principle fail...Levin's strategy of rejecting Revelation is itself controversial, as Johnston an...McGinn's argument against dispositionalism rests on specific assumptionsMcGinn's phenomenological argument does not depend on Revelation but on the intr...
    +2 moreShow less
    Scrutinizing assumptions about Revelation leaves intact the core intuition that ...The doctrine of Revelation is relevant to evaluating those assumptions

    Similar

    Existential phenomenology (Sartre and Merleau-Ponty) does not resolve ...76%Dewey's methodological critique of unquestioned posits applies equally...75%Hegel's claim about the identity of thinking and being could be interp...74%Kumārila's account of epistemic defeat involves essentially phenomenol...74%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: color
    View source passageHide passage
    Levin 2000 has provided a powerful reply, on behalf of the dispositionalist, to McGinn’s argument. Her challenge is complex, highlighting the assumptions that underpin McGinn’s criticism (and has a detailed discussion of the relevance of the doctrine of Revelation). An important question seems to remain, however. In McGinn’s formulation of the phenomenological problem, there are two distinct claims, each of which is crucial: (1) Colors do not look like the sorts of dispositional properties they
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit