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
    Wittgenstein's rule-following considerations show that no... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→More ambitious arguments for meaning, thought, and selfhood being strongly socially constituted may not succeed, and Herder's original empirical-causal version may be the correct one.

    Wittgenstein's rule-following considerations show that no private mental act can fix the normative correctness conditions that meaning requires.

    ?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.Mental acts are intrinsically private and accessible only to the subject, making them unsuitable as public normative standards.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Meaning requires objective correctness conditions; what counts as following a rule correctly must transcend individual interpretation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The regress problem shows private acts cannot self-justify their normative force without circular appeal to further mental acts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Normative correctness can emerge from individual dispositions and patterns without requiring transcendent, mind-independent facts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The claim conflates epistemological privacy with metaphysical privacy—mental acts can fix meaning even if only the subject accesses them directly.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Community agreement itself depends on individuals' private understandings; rejecting all private fixation undermines the communal alternative.
      ?

      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

    Philosophy of Language1 linkedPersonal Identity1 linked

    Related

    Community agreement itself depends on individuals' private understandings; rejec...Meaning requires objective correctness conditions; what counts as following a ru...Mental acts are intrinsically private and accessible only to the subject, making...More ambitious arguments for meaning, thought, and selfhood being strongly socia...
    +3 moreShow less
    Normative correctness can emerge from individual dispositions and patterns witho...The claim conflates epistemological privacy with metaphysical privacy—mental act...The regress problem shows private acts cannot self-justify their normative force...

    Details

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