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
    What we call matter is an appearance. — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Perception
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Matter cannot be a thing in itself with characteristics independent of human perception.

    What we call matter is an appearance.

    Perception
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Perception

    Connections

    1 topic

    Truth & Knowledge1 linked

    Related

    Matter cannot be a thing in itself with characteristics independent of human per...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Perception
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Shape, contact, and movement characterize only objects as presented to us, not m...

    Similar

    We cannot talk about appearances without conceding the real existence ...74%We cannot talk about appearances without conceding the real existence ...74%Kant describes appearances as representations but also as objects of r...73%According to Kant, objects in space are only appearances, which are ou...72%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: kant-leibniz
    View source passageHide passage
    Matter, Kant could readily agree with Leibniz, cannot be a thing in itself, stuff possessed of characteristics and qualities independent of human perception; what we call matter is an appearance (4:507). The true nature of mind-independent external reality cannot be described by reference to shape, contact or movement, which characterize only the objects presented to us (A265–6/B 321–2). He understood Leibniz’s reasoning in favour of monads as follows: It is impossible to conceive two material a

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective