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 What is experienced in an illusion is not identical with the physical object (e.g., the stick), but rather sense-data

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.A perceptual experience can misrepresent a physical object without requiring a numerically distinct intermediary object that possesses the misrepresented properties.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The argument from illusion commits a 'phenomenal principle' fallacy: from 'x appears F' it does not follow that 'there is something that is F being experienced'.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Austin demonstrated that 'looks bent' is a relational, context-sensitive predicate that characterizes how the stick appears, not a property instantiated by a separate sense-datum.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Adverbialist accounts (Sellars, Chisholm) analyze illusory experience as being-appeared-to-bently, describing a mode of experiencing rather than an object with bent properties.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Positing sense-data as objects of perception generates a vicious regress: if bent-appearance requires a bent sense-datum, veridical perception of the sense-datum itself demands further explanation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.An illusion (e.g., a bent-looking stick) involves a distinctive sensory experience
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The distinctive sensory experience is apt to give rise to an erroneous perceptual judgment (e.g., that the stick is bent)
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The erroneous perceptual judgment can be explained as accurately representing features presented in the sensory experience (i.e., bent-ness)
      ?

      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.