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
    Therefore Principle 1 cannot accommodate divine perception. — Carmelics
    Home/Divine Attributes
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Principle 1's definition of perception is inadequate because it excludes divine perception.

    Therefore Principle 1 cannot accommodate divine perception.

    Divine AttributesPerception
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

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

    Topics

    Divine AttributesPerception

    Connections

    1 topic

    Truth & Knowledge1 linked

    Related

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Divine Attributes
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Divine perception involves no sensory connection.Divine perception is a genuine form of perception.Principle 1 requires sensory connection as a necessary condition for perception.Principle 1's definition of perception is inadequate because it excludes divine ...

    Similar

    Principle 1's definition of perception is inadequate because it exclud...89%Certainty is impossible apart from some special divine illumination.81%Therefore, the divine cannot be captured in a definition that delimits...81%Insight into the divine will is not accessible to human reason.79%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: early-modern-india
    View source passageHide passage
    Gaṅgeśa criticises Principle 1 on three grounds: (a) it entails that every awareness is perceptual since every awareness is produced by the instrumentality of the ‘inner’ sense faculty or manas; (b) it fails to include divine perception, which involves no sensory connection; and (c) there is no one type of sensory connection, nor anything obviously in common to the ad hoc list of six types. Gaṅgeśa therefore offers a new definition:

    Details

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

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective