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 cannot regard the forms we represent objects as having (spatiality, temporality, causality, etc.) as the real forms of objects independent of ourselves.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kant's premise that we can only know a priori what we ourselves impose assumes a false exhaustion: reliable cognitive faculties shaped by evolution or rational necessity could yield a priori insight into mind-independent structure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Hilary Putnam's internal realism and Wilfrid Sellars's scientific realism both demonstrate that representational success can be explained by correspondence to real structure rather than by idealist imposition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If our spatial and causal representations systematically enable successful prediction and intervention in the world, inference to their mind-independent reality is more parsimonious than positing an unknowable thing-in-itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.A priori knowledge can arise from mind-independent necessary structures in reality itself, not only from mental imposition (cf. Frege, Russell, and mathematical Platonism).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If causality and spatiality are genuine features of a mind-independent world, our a priori grasp of them tracks reality rather than constituting it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.We know these forms (spatiality, temporality, causality) a priori.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.We can only know a priori what we ourselves impose upon experience.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.What we impose upon experience is not derivable from the objects as they are independently of our representations.
      ?

      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.