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 Young infants expect that two physical objects cannot occupy the same space at the same time.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Longer looking in violation-of-expectancy paradigms may reflect perceptual novelty or visual salience rather than conceptual surprise.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Spelke's own studies show infants look longer at physically possible but visually novel events, undermining the inference from looking-time to violated expectation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Without distinguishing perceptual preference from epistemic expectation, the paradigm cannot establish that infants possess a concept of solidity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Piaget's sensorimotor account holds that object permanence and physical knowledge are constructed through action-perception cycles, not innately represented.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If physical-object concepts emerge from repeated sensorimotor feedback rather than core cognition, the looking-time data reflects learned statistical regularities, not innate principles.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Haith's critique establishes that infants' looking behaviors are fully explicable by low-level perceptual expectancies without positing abstract object representations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The violation-of-expectancy paradigm requires infants to find the screen-passing-through-object event impossible.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Infants looked longer at the impossible event.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.For the event to constitute a violation, infants must assume two objects cannot occupy the same space simultaneously.
      ?

      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.