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 Propositional completeness of S does not entail cognitive or epistemic completeness, as Levine's explanatory gap argument demonstrates.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The explanatory gap reflects epistemic limitations of current science, not metaphysical incompleteness of physical description.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Subjective experience may be a complex functional or relational property adequately captured in sophisticated propositional terms.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Levine himself rejected inferring ontological gaps from epistemological gaps, undermining the argument's strongest interpretation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Complete physical descriptions of neural correlates leave subjective qualities (qualia) unexplained, revealing an explanatory gap.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Knowledge-by-acquaintance of conscious experience differs categorically from propositional knowledge about brain states.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Logical entailment requires no explanatory remainder; propositional completeness demonstrably leaves one, so entailment fails.
      ?

      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.