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
    Our beliefs about change and continuity in experience are... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Consciousness & Mind
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Our beliefs about change and continuity in experience are false

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Neuroscience shows temporal binding windows (~2-3 seconds) construct unified experience retrospectively, not through direct awareness of succession.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.What feels like continuous perception is a post-hoc narrative assembled from discrete neural snapshots, as Dennett's Multiple Drafts model demonstrates.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If continuity is constructed rather than directly perceived, our introspective belief that we 'directly witness' change is systematically mistaken.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Husserl's retention-protention structure, meant to ground temporal experience, itself presupposes a 'now-point' that cannot be directly experienced without infinite regress.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Any belief grounded in a structure containing irresolvable regress lacks the epistemic foundation required for that belief to count as veridical.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • It is impossible to provide an intelligible account of how we can be directly aware of change or movement
      ?

      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

    Consciousness & MindTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Perception1 linked

    Related

    Any belief grounded in a structure containing irresolvable regress lacks the epi...Husserl's retention-protention structure, meant to ground temporal experience, i...If continuity is constructed rather than directly perceived, our introspective b...It is impossible to provide an intelligible account of how we can be directly aw...
    +2 moreShow less
    Neuroscience shows temporal binding windows (~2-3 seconds) construct unified exp...What feels like continuous perception is a post-hoc narrative assembled from dis...

    Similar

    If we believe our immediate experience exhibits continuity and embrace...82%When one has an experience of smooth continuous change, that experienc...78%Introspection reveals change and continuity as features of our experie...77%Agents with beliefs are instead required only to be consistent (unable...76%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: consciousness-temporal
    View source passageHide passage
    In response realists will fully accept that we believe that change and continuity (of the Modest and/or Strong forms) are features of our immediate experience. What they are unlikely to accept is the proposal that (in effect) these features of our experience reduce to these beliefs. They will claim – and on the face of it, plausibly – that we know there is more to our consciousness than our beliefs about our consciousness. We know this because we have direct introspective access to the content a
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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