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
    Strawson's 'Bounds of Sense' argues that meaningful thoug... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Thinking about things in themselves using categories does not establish that there are things in themselves falling under the categories

    Strawson's 'Bounds of Sense' argues that meaningful thought requires applicability conditions that are not merely subjective but track structural features of reality.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Thoughts about objects require stable, publicly accessible referents; pure subjectivity cannot ground meaningful discourse about shared reality.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Kant's categories (space, time, causality) structure both cognition and experience, enabling thoughts to track objective features, not mere appearances.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If applicability conditions were purely subjective, we couldn't explain why some thoughts succeed at representing while others systematically fail.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The claim conflates 'structural features we can access' with 'features independent of all possible cognition'—a gap Strawson never adequately closes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Mathematics and logic have applicability conditions that are structural yet arguably non-empirical; this complicates the reality-tracking requirement.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Strawson assumes coherence between human cognitive structure and reality's structure, but offers no principled argument against this being coincidental.
      ?

      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.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedSkepticism1 linked

    Related

    If applicability conditions were purely subjective, we couldn't explain why some...Kant's categories (space, time, causality) structure both cognition and experien...Mathematics and logic have applicability conditions that are structural yet argu...Strawson assumes coherence between human cognitive structure and reality's struc...
    +3 moreShow less
    The claim conflates 'structural features we can access' with 'features independe...Thinking about things in themselves using categories does not establish that the...Thoughts about objects require stable, publicly accessible referents; pure subje...

    Details

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