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 A-occurring does not entail B-occurring.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.If A-occurrence just is B-occurrence under a different description, then A-occurring necessarily entails B-occurring.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Boethius and Aquinas both treat eternal 'now' as the ontological ground of temporal 'now', making the two modes co-referential.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Co-referential modes of occurrence cannot be logically separated without equivocating on what 'occurring' means.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Presentism holds that only what exists at the present temporal location genuinely exists or occurs.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If presentism is true, then any genuine occurrence must be locatable at some temporal B-series position, collapsing A-occurrence into B-occurrence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The supporting argument's P1 presupposes a tensed-fact ontology that itself requires defense against presentist rivals like those advanced by Bigelow and Crisp.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Something can occur now without occurring at a temporal B-location t that is now.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Something can A-occur without B-occurring.
      ?

      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.