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 An abundant conception of properties naturally accommodates logically compound properties

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Sparse conceptions (Armstrong, Lewis) hold that only causally efficacious, natural properties are genuine, excluding mere logical constructs.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If logically compound 'properties' like disjunctions lack causal powers, they fail to do the real metaphysical work properties are posited to do.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Accommodation of logical compounds within abundant conceptions conflates semantic convenience with genuine ontological commitment to properties.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Mellor and Oliver argue that admitting all logically compound properties generates vicious regress and redundancy in property ontology.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If every predicate extension generates a property, the abundant view loses explanatory traction precisely because it cannot distinguish natural from gerrymandered properties.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The abundant conception focuses on meaning and mental content
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Postulating logically compound properties accounts for our understanding of complex predicates and how they differ from simple ones
      ?

      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.