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
    The empirical universe is an objective but less-than-real... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Natural Theology
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The empirical universe is an objective but less-than-real appearance (māyā), not fully real nor fully unreal.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.External objects are perceived with intersubjective agreement, so they are not individual subjective illusions and are independent of mind.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The universe cannot be both fully real and fully unreal simultaneously without contradiction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A third ontological category is needed: an appearance that is objective yet less-than-real.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.A coherent ontology requires that existence is binary: any entity either exists or does not, with no stable intermediate grade of being.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The Advaita 'third category' (anirvacanīya) borrows predicates from both real and unreal without grounding what makes such borrowing coherent, rendering it formally empty.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Bertrand Russell and the analytic tradition hold that apparent ontological puzzles dissolve under proper logical analysis rather than requiring new ontological categories.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Intersubjective perceptual agreement, as Kant argued, is fully explicable by shared cognitive structures without positing a mind-independent but less-than-real appearance.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If māyā is grounded in and produced by Brahman, it stands in a real causal relation to Brahman, which undermines the claim that it is less than fully real.
      ?

      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

    Natural TheologyModality & Possibility

    Connections

    2 topics

    Perception3 linkedTruth & Knowledge2 linked

    Related

    A coherent ontology requires that existence is binary: any entity either exists ...A third ontological category is needed: an appearance that is objective yet less...Bertrand Russell and the analytic tradition hold that apparent ontological puzzl...External objects are perceived with intersubjective agreement, so they are not i...
    +5 moreShow less
    If māyā is grounded in and produced by Brahman, it stands in a real causal relat...Intersubjective perceptual agreement, as Kant argued, is fully explicable by sha...Objects are unreal in that they are transient and dependent, yet are not non-exi...

    Similar

    The phenomenal empirical world is an illusory false reality rather tha...85%The conventional empirical reality (vyāvahārikasattā) and ultimate rea...80%Conventional reality is defined in terms of things being intrinsically...79%Fictionalism is consistent with an essentially realistic view of empir...78%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: shankara
    View source passageHide passage
    Still, the empirical universe presents an ontological difficulty for Śaṅkara because he is an epistemic realist. He accepts that external objects are not individual subjective illusions because we perceive these effects with intersubjective agreement. The world is thus independent of mind and not wholly unreal. One may therefore argue that he contradicts himself or falls into an excluded middle (see Fost 1998). The universe either exists or does not exist, is real or unreal, and cannot be both s
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

    The Advaita 'third category' (anirvacanīya) borrows predicates from both real an...
    The universe cannot be both fully real and fully unreal simultaneously without c...
    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit