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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Ryle's dispositional analysis shows that mental predicates like desire are behavioral dispositions, not markers of an inner metaphysical entity inhabiting the body.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Behavioral dispositions are mere regularities; they don't explain why someone with identical dispositions reports different subjective experiences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A paralyzed person retains desires despite lacking behavioral dispositions to act on them, showing desire transcends behavioral potential.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Mental predicates seem to have intrinsic phenomenological content (what desire feels like) that behavioral analysis systematically omits.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Observable behavioral patterns provide sufficient grounds for attributing mental states without positing unobservable inner entities.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Positing immaterial minds creates intractable interaction problems: how does non-physical desire causally influence physical behavior?
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Desiring X consists in dispositions to behave in ways characteristic of X-seekers; nothing further is ontologically required.
      ?

      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.
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42