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 Any counterexample to strong individual supervenience can be isolated to generate a counterexample to weak global supervenience

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The isolation principle presupposes that any locally coherent configuration of B-properties can be embedded in a possible world as a self-contained duplicate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Holistic metaphysical frameworks (e.g., Bradley's internal relations, certain interpretations of quantum entanglement ontology) entail that some B-property distributions are nomologically or metaphysically inseparable from their global context.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If B-property configurations cannot be freely isolated into worlds without altering their relational character, the Paull-Sider construction fails to generate the required globally divergent world-pair.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Global supervenience is defined over entire possible worlds, whose individuation conditions may not reduce to aggregates of individual-level property assignments.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.David Lewis's counterpart theory and Haecceitism debates show that world-level isomorphism and individual-level property preservation can come apart depending on one's theory of trans-world identity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A counterexample to strong individual supervenience involving individuals with contested cross-world identity cannot be straightforwardly re-described as a failure of global supervenience without begging the question against Haecceitist ontologies.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Paull and Sider's isolation principle holds
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A counterexample to strong individual supervenience consists of a case where B-properties are preserved but A-properties are not across individuals
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Isolation allows such a case to be extended to a pair of worlds between which there is a B-preserving isomorphism but no A-preserving one
      ?

      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.