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
    We must have some knowledge of our own attitudes (beliefs... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Consciousness & Mind
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    We must have some knowledge of our own attitudes (beliefs, desires, commitments, suppositions).

    Consciousness & MindTruth & 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.To be capable of critical reasoning, one must be able to recognize one's own attitudes, knowledgeably evaluating, identifying, and reviewing one's beliefs, desires, commitments, and suppositions as the states they are.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.We are capable of critical reasoning (assumed for the sake of transcendental argument).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Introspective reports systematically misrepresent underlying mental states, as Nisbett & Wilson's 1977 experiments on verbal reports demonstrate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Competent critical reasoning requires only functional access to attitudes, not accurate knowledge of their content or nature.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.One can evaluate and revise beliefs under systematically false descriptions of those beliefs, as confabulation research in cognitive science confirms.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Freudian and post-Freudian psychology establishes that agents regularly act from motivational states they sincerely and systematically disavow.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If unconscious desires and commitments causally drive behavior and reasoning, the transcendental argument from critical reasoning does not entail conscious self-knowledge of those attitudes.
      ?

      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

    Consciousness & MindTruth & Knowledge

    Key Terms

    knowledge(Distinguished from mere true belief, which may be the product of indoctrination and need not exercise deliberative capacities.)
    Justified true belief — true belief that has been arrived at through the exercise of deliberative capacities, including comparison of and deliberation among alternatives.

    Related

    Competent critical reasoning requires only functional access to attitudes, not a...Freudian and post-Freudian psychology establishes that agents regularly act from...If unconscious desires and commitments causally drive behavior and reasoning, th...Introspective reports systematically misrepresent underlying mental states, as N...
    +3 moreShow less
    One can evaluate and revise beliefs under systematically false descriptions of t...To be capable of critical reasoning, one must be able to recognize one's own att...We are capable of critical reasoning (assumed for the sake of transcendental arg...

    Similar

    We must sometimes know our own beliefs and desires.84%Partial beliefs are not explicit attitudes but may be reconstructed fr...81%Propositional attitudes other than justified belief, such as fears and...79%Reasoning requires explicit attitudes77%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: introspection
    View source passageHide passage
    Transcendental arguments for the accuracy of certain sorts of self-knowledge offer a different sort of epistemic guarantee—“transcendental arguments” being arguments that assume the existence of some sort of experience or capacity, then develop insights about the background conditions necessary for that experience or capacity, and finally conclude that those background conditions must in fact be met. Burge (1996; see also Shoemaker 1988) argues that to be capable of “critical reasoning” one must
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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