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 Reason's transcendental ideas of the unconditioned can never provide theoretical knowledge of any object

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Hegel argues that Kant's prohibition on theoretical knowledge of the unconditioned itself presupposes a determinate concept of what lies beyond conceptual reach.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A limit can only be identified by a cognition that already grasps what lies on both sides of it, so Kant's critical boundary-drawing covertly claims the very unconditioned knowledge it denies.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore the Kantian restriction is self-undermining: reason demonstrates its grasp of the unconditioned in the very act of pronouncing that grasp impossible.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Aristotelian-Thomistic natural theology holds that analogical predication allows finite concepts to extend to infinite being without requiring sensory intuition of that being.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If concepts can function cognitively through analogy rather than direct intuition, Kant's P1 — that knowledge requires intuition — is not a universal constraint but an assumption tied to his specific faculty psychology.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Aquinas's Five Ways thus constitute a standing counter-example: inferential chains from conditioned effects yield genuine, if analogical, theoretical knowledge of an unconditioned cause.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Knowledge requires both intuition and concept
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Intuition is always conditioned — the representation of any region of space is conditioned by more surrounding space, and any region of time is conditioned by more time before and after it
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Reason forms ideas of unconditioned entities (the self as substance, a completed world-whole, and God) that by definition exceed all conditions
      ?

      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.