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 Wittgenstein's separation of understanding from effect presupposes a mind-world dualism that pragmatist and enactivist frameworks explicitly reject.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Wittgenstein explicitly criticizes the 'inner/outer' picture as philosophical confusion; his later work rejects the dualism being attributed to him.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Understanding-as-use doctrine shows understanding just is the ability to deploy language in practice, not a separate mental state preceding use.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Pragmatists and enactivists themselves must distinguish what understanding involves from mere mechanical behavior, making some separation inescapable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Wittgenstein treats understanding as internal mental act separable from external behavioral consequences, a hallmark of dualism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Pragmatism and enactivism posit understanding as constitutively dependent on embodied action and environmental interaction, not mental states alone.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Wittgenstein's private language argument assumes an inner criterion of correctness independent of public practice, presupposing mind-world separation.
      ?

      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.