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
    Representing empirical objects in space is not illusory. — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Perception
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Representing empirical objects in space is not illusory.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.If an epistemic condition E does not accurately represent its objects, then representing objects with E is an illusion.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Kant aims to avoid the conclusion that spatial representation of empirical objects is illusory.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Space is a genuine epistemic condition of our cognition, so empirical objects considered as objects of our cognition must fall under space.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.If spatial representation is a mind-imposed form rather than a feature of things-in-themselves, it satisfies the classical definition of illusion as systematic misrepresentation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Kant concedes that space does not belong to objects as they are in themselves, meaning spatial experience fails to disclose the true nature of reality.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A representation that is universally shared and practically indispensable can still constitute collective illusion, as Berkeley's idealism demonstrates.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Sellars argues that Kant's distinction between empirical reality and transcendental ideality is unstable, since any cognition framed as 'merely subjective' in its ultimate ground is epistemically illusory by degree.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the non-illusory status of spatial representation depends solely on intersubjective necessity rather than mind-independent correspondence, this conflates coherence with truth in a question-begging way.
      ?

      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

    PerceptionTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Skepticism1 linked

    Related

    A representation that is universally shared and practically indispensable can st...If an epistemic condition E does not accurately represent its objects, then repr...If spatial representation is a mind-imposed form rather than a feature of things...If the non-illusory status of spatial representation depends solely on intersubj...
    +4 moreShow less
    Kant aims to avoid the conclusion that spatial representation of empirical objec...Kant concedes that space does not belong to objects as they are in themselves, m...Sellars argues that Kant's distinction between empirical reality and transcenden...Space is a genuine epistemic condition of our cognition, so empirical objects co...

    Similar

    Kant aims to avoid the conclusion that spatial representation of empir...84%Space is a genuine epistemic condition of our cognition, so empirical ...81%Kant's Refutation aims to establish a non-contingent conclusion that w...80%Absolute space is not an observable fact of experience79%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: kant-transcendental-idealism
    View source passageHide passage
    This grounds a distinction between two ways of considering the objects of our cognition. When we consider objects qua objects of our cognition, we consider them as falling under the relevant epistemic conditions. If E is an epistemic condition of cognition of objects, then objects must fall under E (i.e., be accurately represented by E); otherwise, in representing them with E, I would not be cognizing objects but misrepresenting them. My representation of objects with E would be an illusion, the
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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