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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that We are not entitled to assert the existence of both ideas and the minds that have them — only the existence of ideas themselves.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.We have no distinct idea of the mind as something separate from its impressions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Asserting the existence of an entity requires having a genuine idea of it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Hume's bundle theory shows the 'self' is just a collection of perceptions with no additional substrate beneath them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the mind just is its ideas bundled together, positing 'mind' as a separate existent is a redundant ontological duplication.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Ockham's Razor demands we eliminate entities that do no explanatory work beyond what the ideas themselves already accomplish.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Berkeley's esse est percipi establishes that the being of any item consists in its being perceived, not in a perceiver distinct from perception.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A 'mind' posited as something over and above the stream of ideas inherits the same epistemic inaccessibility as Kant's unknowable thing-in-itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Asserting existence beyond what is epistemically accessible violates the verificationist constraint that meaningful assertions must be anchored in experiential content.
      ?

      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.
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42