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
    Stroud is pushed toward the immodest conclusion that it i... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Stroud is pushed toward the immodest conclusion that it is not possible for us to be mistaken in our belief that mind-independent objects exist.

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    2 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kant's transcendental idealism entails that the conditions of possible experience necessarily include the representation of mind-independent objects.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If mind-independent objects are a necessary condition of experience, then denying their existence is not merely false but transcendentally incoherent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Transcendental incoherence is stronger than logical impossibility, blocking even conceivability-based skeptical scenarios from gaining traction against CT.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Strawson's principle of significance holds that meaningful deployment of concepts requires possible experiential grounding that confirms those concepts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The skeptical hypothesis SK, applied to mind-independent objects, cannot be given meaningful content under Strawson's constraint without presupposing the very objects it doubts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A hypothesis that presupposes what it denies is self-undermining, vindicating Stroud's immodest conclusion on independent grounds beyond Brueckner's conceivability argument.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Conceivability provides the usual kind of evidence for logical possibility.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Given Brueckner's transcendental argument, there is no conceivability-based evidence that SK is logically possible given CT.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Without such evidence, the position that SK is logically possible given CT is untenable for Stroud.
      ?

      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.

    Topics

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Modality & Possibility2 linked

    Related

    A hypothesis that presupposes what it denies is self-undermining, vindicating St...Conceivability provides the usual kind of evidence for logical possibility.Given Brueckner's transcendental argument, there is no conceivability-based evid...If mind-independent objects are a necessary condition of experience, then denyin...
    +5 moreShow less
    Kant's transcendental idealism entails that the conditions of possible experienc...Strawson's principle of significance holds that meaningful deployment of concept...The skeptical hypothesis SK, applied to mind-independent objects, cannot be give...Transcendental incoherence is stronger than logical impossibility, blocking even...Without such evidence, the position that SK is logically possible given CT is un...

    Similar

    The CVs' belief that mind-independent objects exist would therefore be...88%If the CVs' belief that mind-independent objects exist is true in W, t...84%Given CT, we must also conceive of W as featuring mind-independent obj...84%Necessary truths cannot be true in virtue of mind-independent Platonic...81%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: kant-transcendental
    View source passageHide passage
    Stroud argues, in effect, that given CT we cannot believe that (i) and (ii) are true, but nonetheless, we can believe that (i) and (ii) are logically compossible given CT. Brueckner argues that using similar reasoning, given CT we cannot conceive of a possible world in which both (i) and (ii) hold, and this fact undermines Stroud’s claim. To conceive of a world W in which (i) is true is to conceive of a world in which we (in the actual world) attribute beliefs about mind-independent objects to c
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit