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 inference from 'appearance cannot be denied' to 'appe... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Appearance, though inconsistent with itself, cannot be divorced from reality.

    The inference from 'appearance cannot be denied' to 'appearance must be connected to reality' conflates epistemic unavoidability with ontological integration.

    ?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.Epistemic unavoidability (we cannot doubt appearances) differs categorically from ontological claims (appearances must connect to reality).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A fact about our cognitive limitations doesn't entail conclusions about external reality's structure or composition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Appearances could be systematically disconnected from reality yet remain psychologically inescapable (as in radical skeptical scenarios).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Any appearance necessarily exists as a mental event, thus is already ontologically integrated into the causal order of consciousness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Epistemic unavoidability itself grounds a weak ontological claim: appearances must exist and have some relational structure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The distinction between epistemic and ontological may be artificial; our only cognitive access to reality is through appearances.
      ?

      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.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedPerception1 linked

    Related

    A fact about our cognitive limitations doesn't entail conclusions about external...Any appearance necessarily exists as a mental event, thus is already ontological...Appearance, though inconsistent with itself, cannot be divorced from reality.Appearances could be systematically disconnected from reality yet remain psychol...
    +3 moreShow less
    Epistemic unavoidability (we cannot doubt appearances) differs categorically fro...Epistemic unavoidability itself grounds a weak ontological claim: appearances mu...The distinction between epistemic and ontological may be artificial; our only co...

    Details

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