A position that appeals to degree without grounding those degrees in a continuous developmental ontology is internally unstable and collapses into either full Aristotelian gradualism or strict Stoic binarism.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Aristotelian gradualism(as a philosophical position on change): Aristotle's idea that things change smoothly and gradually, without sharp breaks—like how a child grows into an adult by stages rather than suddenly becoming one.
Degree/degrees(as used in this argument about gradations): Differences in amount or intensity—like saying something is 'somewhat true' or 'very true' rather than just 'true' or 'false.'
Developmental ontology(as used in this metaphysical argument): A framework that explains how things change and develop over time by looking at what they fundamentally are—the idea that change and growth are built into the basic nature of things.
Ontology(Carnap argues this enterprise is based on a mistake): The philosophical discipline that tries to answer hard questions about what there really is.

Based on where you are in your exploration