Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Reflection can constitute experience rather than merely re-present it, as Sartre himself acknowledges in impure reflection's distorting role.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Distortion of experience by reflection does not establish constitution; it may simply show that representation is imperfect or mediated.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Even if reflection alters consciousness, the original pre-reflective experience remains distinct and prior—reflection comments on it rather than creating it.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Sartre's acknowledgment of impure reflection's distorting role suggests he recognizes a gap between reality and reflection, preserving their conceptual distinction.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Sartre's impure reflection demonstrates that the act of reflecting inevitably alters consciousness, making reflection constitutive rather than merely representational.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If reflection creates new intentional states through distortion, then the reflected-upon experience is genuinely different from pre-reflective experience.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
The phenomenological gap between living an experience and reflecting upon it shows reflection generates novel experiential content, not mere copies.
?
How convincing is this?
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.