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 Thinking and being are not fundamentally opposed but are ultimately the same.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Being exhibits properties—contingency, resistance, opacity—that are irreducible to and independent of any cognitive or conceptual structure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Heidegger's analysis of 'thrownness' shows that Dasein always finds itself already in a world it did not think into existence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If being were ultimately identical to thinking, the brute facticity of existence would be explicable through reason alone, which it demonstrably is not.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Frege's distinction between sense and reference demonstrates that thought can fail to determine a unique referent, showing thought and being come apart systematically.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Russell's discovery of the paradox of classes reveals that unrestricted identification of logical thought with ontological structure generates formal contradictions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A system that eliminates the opposition between thinking and being to avoid antinomies merely relocates the contradictions into the structure of ideality itself, as Schelling's late critique of Hegel demonstrates.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.To conceive of thinking and being as fundamentally opposed leads to inconsistencies, contradictions, antinomies, and other philosophical deficiencies.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A viable idealistic system must overcome these deficiencies by eliminating the underlying fundamental opposition between thinking and being.
      ?

      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.