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 'Individuals' grounds personhood in the irredu... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→No thought experiment that involves non-human animals or computers as persons is well conceived.

    Strawson's 'Individuals' grounds personhood in the irreducible unity of psychological and physical predicates ascribable to a single subject of experience.

    ?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.Persons are uniquely capable of self-ascription: only subjects can ascribe both mental states ('I think') and bodily states ('I am tired') to themselves.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Separating mental from physical predicates creates philosophical puzzles (mind-body problem) that dissolve when treating persons as irreducible unities.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Our practical concept of personhood requires unified accountability: we hold one subject responsible for both actions and intentions, not mind and body separately.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Irreducibility claims lack explanatory power: asserting unity without mechanistic account of psycho-physical interaction leaves the hard problem unresolved.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Dissociative and neurological cases show psychological and physical predicates can diverge significantly, challenging the claim of necessary irreducible unity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Non-human animals display unified psychological-physical predicates yet we hesitate calling them 'persons,' suggesting unity alone cannot ground personhood.
      ?

      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

    1 topic

    Personal Identity1 linked

    Related

    Dissociative and neurological cases show psychological and physical predicates c...Irreducibility claims lack explanatory power: asserting unity without mechanisti...No thought experiment that involves non-human animals or computers as persons is...Non-human animals display unified psychological-physical predicates yet we hesit...
    +3 moreShow less
    Our practical concept of personhood requires unified accountability: we hold one...Persons are uniquely capable of self-ascription: only subjects can ascribe both ...Separating mental from physical predicates creates philosophical puzzles (mind-b...

    Details

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