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
    Modal claims connecting aspects of thought to one another... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→The symmetry between intra-thought modal claims and thought-to-world modal claims could be grounds for suspicion of all such modal claims.

    Modal claims connecting aspects of thought to one another face no obviously different epistemic standing than modal claims connecting thought to the world.

    Modality & PossibilitySkepticism
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    SkepticismModality & Possibility

    Related

    If both types of modal claim are equally difficult to defend, skepticism about b...The symmetry between intra-thought modal claims and thought-to-world modal claim...

    Similar

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Skepticism
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    No principled account is provided by Stroud for why modal connections ...83%The symmetry between intra-thought modal claims and thought-to-world m...83%If modal connections are viable between psychological facts, then the ...82%Stroud's position is inconsistent, because he cannot coherently permit...80%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: transcendental-arguments
    View source passageHide passage
    Perhaps one difficulty that can be raised for Stroud, is that while he thinks there is something inherently problematic in making a claim about how the world must be as a condition for our thought or experience, he does not think that there is anything particularly problematic about claiming that our thought or experience is a necessary condition for some other aspect of our thought or experience – indeed, he exploits such claims himself in his own arguments against the skeptic (cf. Stroud 1994

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective