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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that The part-whole relation of the representation of space is distinct from the part-whole relation that obtains for concepts.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Frege's analysis of number concepts shows that concepts like 'successor' and 'zero' generate an infinite structure where no concept-part can be fully individuated without implicit reference to the whole number series.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Husserl's third Logical Investigation demonstrates that 'dependent' (non-independent) conceptual parts require their containing wholes for their very possibility, mirroring the structure Kant attributes exclusively to space.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If conceptual part-whole relations can themselves exhibit the same dependence of parts on wholes that Kant identifies in spatial representation, the alleged structural distinctness collapses into a difference of degree rather than kind.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Conceptual mereology in Leibniz's monadology also exhibits whole-priority: monads derive their determinate properties only through their relational position in the pre-established whole.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If whole-priority is not unique to spatial representation but also appears in certain conceptual systems, then whole-priority alone cannot mark a categorical distinction between spatial and conceptual part-whole relations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.For concepts, parts of the intension can be represented independently of the whole concept.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.For the representation of space, places (the 'parts') are obtained only by delimiting subsections of the one all-encompassing space, making the whole prior to the parts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A relation in which the whole is prior to any part is structurally different from a relation in which parts can be represented independently of the whole.
      ?

      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.