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 Non-Modal versions of Retentionalism suffer from a serious problem with surplus content

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Retentionalist specious presents form a close-packed continuum
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Each specious present has an apparent duration (e.g., one second), independent of objective clock-time
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If there are a hundred specious presents per objective second, then over ten objective seconds there are one thousand specious presents
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Husserl's retention structure implies that past phases are held as modified, intentionally distinct contents, not re-experienced as fresh present moments.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If retained phases carry diminished, adumbrated intentional content rather than full phenomenal presence, the total apparent duration does not multiply across overlapping specious presents.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Non-modal retentionalism that collapses this Husserlian modification-gradient conflates intentional directedness with phenomenal re-instantiation, generating surplus content through a theoretical error rather than a structural feature of retention itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Dainton's overlap model stipulates that successive specious presents share experiential parts, meaning the same phenomenal content is not duplicated but jointly constituted across adjacent windows.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If shared phenomenal parts are counted only once across overlapping presents, the total apparent duration converges on objective elapsed time rather than multiplying per specious present.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The surplus-content objection therefore targets only non-modal versions that fail to incorporate a part-sharing or overlap constraint, leaving retentionalism with such constraints structurally intact.
      ?

      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.