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 Stroud (1968) argued that transcendental arguments only establish correlations between concepts, not between concepts and mind-independent reality.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Establishing that concept X is necessary for concept Y being intelligible still explains why our experience has that structure in reality.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Stroud conflates epistemological access to reality with metaphysical facts about what conditions reality must satisfy for our cognition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If transcendental arguments only establish correlations, they cannot explain why alternative conceptual schemes are actually impossible.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Transcendental arguments derive conclusions from conceptual analysis alone, without empirical access to mind-independent reality.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If we cannot step outside our conceptual framework to compare it with reality itself, correlations between concepts are all we can establish.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Kant's own framework shows that synthetic a priori knowledge concerns how concepts must relate, not how things-in-themselves actually are.
      ?

      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.