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
    Transcendental arguments can demonstrate that certain bel... — Carmelics
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Transcendental arguments can demonstrate that certain beliefs are fundamental to our thinking and thus impervious to skeptical doubt

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Some beliefs are so fundamental that they cannot be dislodged by skeptical challenge
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Transcendental arguments can reveal which beliefs are fundamental in this way
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Showing a belief to be fundamental supports the naturalist claim that the belief is impervious to skeptical doubt
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Transcendental arguments establish only that we must think in certain ways, not that the world must conform to those ways of thinking.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Stroud's critique shows this gap between subjective necessity and objective validity cannot be bridged without smuggling in verificationism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A belief can be psychologically indispensable yet epistemically vulnerable if its indispensability merely reflects cognitive limitation rather than truth.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kant's own transcendental idealism concedes that categories apply only to phenomena, leaving things-in-themselves beyond justified belief.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the foundational move requires idealist constraints to work, transcendental arguments presuppose rather than defeat the skeptic's challenge about mind-independent reality.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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

    Topics

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge

    Related

    A belief can be psychologically indispensable yet epistemically vulnerable if it...If the foundational move requires idealist constraints to work, transcendental a...Kant's own transcendental idealism concedes that categories apply only to phenom...Showing a belief to be fundamental supports the naturalist claim that the belief...
    +4 moreShow less
    Some beliefs are so fundamental that they cannot be dislodged by skeptical chall...Stroud's critique shows this gap between subjective necessity and objective vali...Transcendental arguments can reveal which beliefs are fundamental in this wayTranscendental arguments establish only that we must think in certain ways, not ...

    Similar

    Some beliefs are so deeply embedded in our thinking that they cannot b...89%Transcendental arguments can reveal which beliefs are fundamental in t...88%Some beliefs are so fundamental that they cannot be dislodged by skept...88%The embeddedness of beliefs within our thinking renders them imperviou...86%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: transcendental-arguments
    View source passageHide passage
    Now, whether or not this is the most charitable way of reading Strawson’s earlier position, he himself does not seem to have adopted quite this first response when he came to reply to Stroud in his later work. Rather, while he accepts Stroud’s insistence that the transcendental claim must be weakened (cf. Strawson 1985: 9), he then also offers what he call a naturalistic reply to the skeptic based on Hume and also on some Wittgensteinian ideas developed in On Certainty, according to which the ri
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit