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
    Our inability to conceive of a possible world in which SK... — Carmelics
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→There is strong evidence against the claim that the skeptical scenario SK is logically possible given CT.

    Our inability to conceive of a possible world in which SK is true given CT constitutes strong evidence against SK's logical possibility given CT.

    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

    There is strong evidence against the claim that the skeptical scenario SK is log...We cannot conceive of a possible world in which, given CT, SK is true.

    Similar

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Skepticism
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    We cannot conceive of a possible world in which, given CT, SK is true.89%We cannot conceive of a possible world in which, given CT, the skeptic...89%There is strong evidence against the claim that the skeptical scenario...87%Without such evidence, the position that SK is logically possible give...85%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: kant-transcendental
    View source passageHide passage
    Stroud argues, in effect, that given CT we cannot believe that (i) and (ii) are true, but nonetheless, we can believe that (i) and (ii) are logically compossible given CT. Brueckner argues that using similar reasoning, given CT we cannot conceive of a possible world in which both (i) and (ii) hold, and this fact undermines Stroud’s claim. To conceive of a world W in which (i) is true is to conceive of a world in which we (in the actual world) attribute beliefs about mind-independent objects to c

    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