A polar concept argument is a type of argument that posits the understanding of one concept, from the mere understanding of its polar opposite. A well-known instance of a polar concept argument is Gilbert Ryle's argument against scepticism (1960). According to Anthony Grayling's characterisation, Ryle's argument can be stated as follows:
According to Ryle's polar concept argument, counterfeit and genuine coins come in pairs, and one cannot conceive of counterfeit coins without also capturing the essence of the genuine coins at the same time. When one grasps the essence of one polar concept, one also grasps immediately the essence of its polar opposite. Ryle's original argument (1960) runs as follows:
A polar concept argument bears on some more or less strong version of dialectical monism, a philosophical doctrine that views reality as a unified whole, due to the complementarity of polar concepts.
A polar concept argument is a type of argument that posits the understanding of one concept, from the mere understanding of its polar opposite. A well-known instance of a polar concept argument is Gilbert Ryle's argument against scepticism (1960). According to Anthony Grayling's characterisation, Ryle's argument can be stated as follows:
According to Ryle's polar concept argument, counterfeit and genuine coins come in pairs, and one cannot conceive of counterfeit coins without also capturing the essence of the genuine coins at the same time. When one grasps the essence of one polar concept, one also grasps immediately the essence of its polar opposite. Ryle's original argument (1960) runs as follows:
A polar concept argument bears on some more or less strong version of dialectical monism, a philosophical doctrine that views reality as a unified whole, due to the complementarity of polar concepts.