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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that The Cartesian move from 'I think' to 'I am' is no longer available to modern thought.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Descartes' cogito does not assert that thought exhausts the self, but only that thinking entails existence as a minimal, indubitable fact.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Foucault's objection conflates the epistemic scope of the cogito with an ontological claim Descartes never made about the full content of the self.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Even under historicist accounts of subjectivity, the reflexive act of doubting still logically presupposes a subject who doubts, preserving the inferential core of the cogito.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Husserl's transcendental phenomenology demonstrates that the move from 'I think' to 'I am' survives the reduction precisely because it operates at the level of pure intentional structure, not empirical content.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Foucault's counter-argument targets only the empirical-psychological reading of the cogito, leaving the transcendental version, defended by Husserl and Sartre, largely untouched.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The content of a person's reality—living, working, speaking—always exceeds what can be captured by a merely thinking self.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Conversely, if 'I' denotes only a conscious being, then that 'I' fails to encompass most of what the self-in-the-world actually is.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Thought cannot be separated from the empirical and historical unthought that constitutes who we 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.
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42