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
    The Derridean slide from 'in principle shareable' to 'alw... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→A secret as such does not exist; every secret is necessarily shared.

    The Derridean slide from 'in principle shareable' to 'always already shared' commits a modal fallacy, confusing possibility with actuality in a way that would also dissolve meaningful distinctions like public/private and disclosure/concealment.

    ?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.Modal distinctions (possible vs. actual) are logically foundational; collapsing them undermines rigorous philosophical argumentation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If 'shareable in principle' entails 'already shared,' then private thoughts become conceptually incoherent, contradicting lived experience.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Derrida's move treats potentiality as actuality without argument, a sleight-of-hand that avoids rather than solves the problem.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Derrida denies a clean in-principle/actual divide; language's iterability means 'shareable' already constitutes structural belonging to alterity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The critique assumes 'shared' means 'consciously accessed,' but structural shareability doesn't require conscious actualization of content.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Public/private remain operationally meaningful even if their metaphysical foundations are unstable, so the distinction need not dissolve entirely.
      ?

      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.

    Key Terms

    Always already shared(Where the argument supposedly jumps to without justification)
    Something that is *inevitably* or *by necessity* shared from the moment it exists, not just capable of being shared.
    Derrida / Derridean(The statement refers to an argument Derrida made about how meaning works)
    Jacques Derrida was a 20th-century French philosopher who developed a way of reading texts called 'deconstruction,' which looks for hidden contradictions and unstated assumptions in writing and thinking.
    Disclosure/concealment(Another example of a meaningful difference the fallacy would destroy)
    Disclosure means revealing or making something known; concealment means hiding it or keeping it secret.
    Dissolve (meaningful distinctions)(What the fallacy supposedly does to important categories)
    To make something disappear or become meaningless—here, to erase the real difference between two separate concepts.
    In principle shareable(The starting point of the argument being criticized)
    Something that could *theoretically* or *by its nature* be shared with others, even if it hasn't been shared yet.
    Possibility vs. actuality(The two different things the argument supposedly confuses)
    Possibility means something *could* happen or *could* be true; actuality means it *really does* happen or *really is* true right now.
    Public/private distinction(An example of a meaningful difference the fallacy would destroy)
    The difference between things meant for everyone to know (public) versus things meant to stay hidden or personal (private).
    modal fallacy(Epistemology and modal logic)
    An invalid inference resulting from illicit substitution of a non-rigid designator into a modal context, producing a false conclusion from true premises

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedPhilosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    A secret as such does not exist; every secret is necessarily shared.Derrida denies a clean in-principle/actual divide; language's iterability means ...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit
    Derrida's move treats potentiality as actuality without argument, a sleight-of-h...
    If 'shareable in principle' entails 'already shared,' then private thoughts beco...
    +3 moreShow less
    Modal distinctions (possible vs. actual) are logically foundational; collapsing ...Public/private remain operationally meaningful even if their metaphysical founda...The critique assumes 'shared' means 'consciously accessed,' but structural share...