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 One representation cannot completely crowd out a second representation from consciousness.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Hume's bundle theory holds that representations are discrete, transient perceptions with no guarantee of persistence once crowded from the attentional field.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If a representation is a momentary impression lacking enduring substance, it can cease entirely rather than subsisting below a limen as Herbart requires.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Herbart's claim presupposes a quasi-substantial continuity of mental content that empiricist psychology explicitly rejects as metaphysical smuggling.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Empirical cases of total amnesia and anesthesia demonstrate that specific representations can become entirely inaccessible, with zero phenomenal remainder.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If a representation leaves no functional or phenomenal trace whatsoever, Herbart's algebraic remainder [R_b] > 0 is an unfalsifiable theoretical posit, not an empirical claim.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The remainder of a representation b (denoted [R_b]) can never equal zero.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A representation is only fully inhibited when it falls below the limen, which requires sufficient opposing force.
      ?

      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