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 We can have no theoretical knowledge of the ultimate constitution of reality as it is in itself, independent of our representations.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Science's predictive success and convergence toward unified theories constitute abductive evidence for the approximate truth of its structural claims about mind-independent reality.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If our representations were systematically disconnected from reality's constitution, the extraordinary precision of quantum electrodynamics and general relativity would be an inexplicable miracle.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, inference to the best explanation licenses at least structural theoretical knowledge of reality, contra the agnosticism the claim demands.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Russell and Ramsey's structural realism holds that while we cannot know the intrinsic nature of physical relata, we can have genuine knowledge of the formal relations that constitute reality's structure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The claim conflates knowledge of intrinsic categorical properties with knowledge of structural, relational features, treating the inaccessibility of the former as grounds for global theoretical agnosticism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Since mathematics demonstrably describes these structural features independent of any particular observer's representations, theoretical knowledge of mind-independent reality in its relational constitution is achievable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Something exists independently of our representations of it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.We cannot determine whether, independent of appearances, material objects consist of substances and their attributes standing in spatio-temporal or causal relations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.We cannot determine whether whatever we experience as an object is in the end some mental product of a divine mind with creative powers unlike any we can make sense of.
      ?

      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.