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 must deny that things-in-themselves possess spatio-temporal structure

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Transcendental idealism's own coherence requires things-in-themselves to causally affect sensibility, presupposing temporal succession.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Causal affection between things-in-themselves and the mind implicitly attributes temporal priority to the noumenal cause.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A thing-in-itself that causally precedes experience cannot be wholly stripped of temporal structure without making affection unintelligible.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Structural realists like Worrall argue that science tracks the relational structure of mind-independent reality, not merely appearances.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If successful scientific theories preserve structural features across theory change, those structures plausibly belong to things-in-themselves.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Denying spatio-temporal structure to things-in-themselves conflicts with the explanatory success of physics, which quantifies over such structures mind-independently.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Any isomorphism between knowledge and the known must be necessary
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.There is no ground to assert a necessary isomorphism between the spatio-temporal structure of our experience and the spatio-temporal structure of things as they are in themselves
      ?

      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.