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
    Without perceptual or quasi-perceptual contact, no such c... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Perceptual contact with an object is not necessary for thinking of that object directly, even without appeal to the dthat-operator.

    Without perceptual or quasi-perceptual contact, no such causal link is established, rendering the purported 'direct' thought indistinguishable from descriptive thought.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Causal chains require spatiotemporal continuity; thought without perceptual contact breaks this continuity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If two thoughts are indistinguishable in content and justification, denying them different epistemic status is unjustified.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Direct reference requires non-descriptive, individuating contact with objects; description alone cannot secure this.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Memory of past perceptions can establish causal links without current perceptual contact; this suffices for directness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Cognitive significance and truth-conditions can differ between thoughts even when indistinguishable in content.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Direct thoughts about abstract objects (numbers, propositions) succeed without perceptual contact, undermining the requirement.
      ?

      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.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Perception1 linkedPhilosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    Causal chains require spatiotemporal continuity; thought without perceptual cont...Cognitive significance and truth-conditions can differ between thoughts even whe...Direct reference requires non-descriptive, individuating contact with objects; d...Direct thoughts about abstract objects (numbers, propositions) succeed without p...
    +3 moreShow less
    If two thoughts are indistinguishable in content and justification, denying them...Memory of past perceptions can establish causal links without current perceptual...Perceptual contact with an object is not necessary for thinking of that object d...

    Details

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