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 proposition 'The mind is a substance' is at best inde... — Carmelics
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The proposition 'The mind is a substance' is at best indeterminate and cannot be known to be true or false

    Consciousness & MindSkepticism
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    0 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.To use the essence of the soul as a premise in a proof, one must know that essence
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Humanity is ignorant about the essence of the soul
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    SkepticismConsciousness & Mind

    Related

    Humanity is ignorant about the essence of the soulTo use the essence of the soul as a premise in a proof, one must know that essen...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Similar

    The mind is distinct from matter and only an immaterial substance is c...82%Things or substances are ideas existing in a mind.80%Things or substances must be ideas (or minds).80%The mind is the substance from which mental modes derive their formal ...80%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: john-norris
    View source passageHide passage
    Norris offers an important insight into how the real distinction proof depends on abstractive processes. However, like Malebranche, Norris claims that we have no access to God's idea of the mind. The mind's existence is known only by inner consciousness, or sentiment. This raises the same problems for Norris that Malebranche has defending the proof. (See Nolan and Whipple 2005.) If humanity is ignorant about the essence of the soul, then there can be no proof using the essence of the soul as a
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    1 (0 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit