Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Therefore, the claim conflates our ignorance of the answer with the answer itself being genuinely unsettled in reality.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Some domains (quantum mechanics, consciousness) may lack determinate facts independent of observation, making the distinction less clear.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
The claim assumes 'genuinely unsettled in reality' is coherent, but vague or indeterminate states might legitimately describe certain phenomena.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Pragmatically, treating something as unsettled (lacking current determination) differs from claiming ignorance—they serve different functions.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Epistemic states (what we know) are distinct from metaphysical states (how reality is). Conflating them commits a basic category error.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Many historical 'unsettled' questions were actually settled facts we simply didn't know yet. Our ignorance didn't make reality indeterminate.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
If ignorance made things genuinely unsettled, the same fact would be both settled and unsettled depending on who knows it—absurd.
?
How convincing is this?
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.