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 Sensa do not really exist; they only create the illusion of existence

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Sense-data (sensa) serve as the epistemological foundation of perceptual knowledge in Russell's early realism and Moore's refutation of idealism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If sensa are illusory, the regress of what grounds perceptual justification leads to skepticism Russell himself found unacceptable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.An entity that systematically and causally structures experience cannot be dismissed as a mere illusion without collapsing the distinction between veridical and hallucinatory perception.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The claim that sensa lack genuine existence conflates ontological dependence on a mind with ontological non-existence, a distinction Chisholm and later intentionalists carefully preserve.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Adverbial theories of sensation (Sellars, Chisholm) show that even denying sense-data as objects does not entail those sensory episodes are illusory—they remain real mental events with causal efficacy.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Sensa arise from a confusion between a perception (which is part of the percipient and therefore mental or spiritual) and the object of that perception (the perceptum)
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A perceptum as a sensum cannot have parts within parts to infinity
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.What genuinely exists has no simple parts, and sensa fail this condition
      ?

      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.