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 Sentences cannot be about understandings alone

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.A sentence about understandings can be necessarily true if the understandings themselves stand in necessary conceptual relations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The concept 'human' analytically contains 'animal' such that entertaining 'human' necessarily co-involves 'animal' as a constituent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If conceptual containment is a real structural feature of mental content, then the conditional holds at the level of understandings without requiring extra-mental referents.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Frege's distinction between sense and reference shows that sentences can be about senses (modes of presentation) rather than objects while still having determinate truth conditions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If intensional entities like senses or understandings are themselves structured and law-governed, Abelard's counterexample fails to establish that truth requires mind-independent referents.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The sentence 'If something is human, it is an animal' would be false if taken to be about understandings
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Someone could entertain the concept human without entertaining the concept animal
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If sentences were about understandings, the antecedent of that conditional could obtain without the consequent, making the conditional false
      ?

      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.