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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that An ontology of abstract propositions multiplies entities beyond necessity when behavioral or functional-state analyses can account for attitude ascriptions without positing abstract objects.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Behavioral equivalence doesn't entail identity: two agents with identical dispositions can have different intentional content.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Mathematical and logical truths require abstract objects; denying them elsewhere undermines explanations relying on them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Functional-state analyses fail to capture the truth-conditions of beliefs about non-existent or counterfactual scenarios.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Occam's Razor favors theories minimizing ontological commitments when empirically equivalent explanations exist.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Functional and behavioral dispositions are publicly observable; abstract propositions are epistemically inaccessible.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Physicalism is simpler than dualism: mental states reduce to brain states without invoking non-physical abstracta.
      ?

      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.
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42