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
    Any posited truthmaker for negative truths—such as totali... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→There must be a thing (a truthmaker) that makes each truth true.

    Any posited truthmaker for negative truths—such as totality facts or absences—is ontologically more problematic than the original commitment to correspondence warrants.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Totality facts and absence entities multiply ontological commitments beyond what negative truths require for semantic adequacy.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Correspondence theory's minimal burden is explaining how truths relate to reality, not postulating exotic entities to ground negations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Simpler theories without negative truthmakers (like semantic or pragmatic approaches) adequately account for negative truths' logical behavior.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.All truthmaker theories—positive or negative—require some posited entities; rejecting negative truthmakers doesn't reduce overall ontological cost.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Absences and totality facts are no more problematic than positive facts; both appear equally real and neither deserves special skepticism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Without truthmakers for negative truths, correspondence theory becomes incoherent about what makes 'There is no gold here' actually true.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    1 topic

    Truth & Knowledge1 linked

    Related

    Absences and totality facts are no more problematic than positive facts; both ap...All truthmaker theories—positive or negative—require some posited entities; reje...Correspondence theory's minimal burden is explaining how truths relate to realit...Simpler theories without negative truthmakers (like semantic or pragmatic approa...
    +3 moreShow less
    There must be a thing (a truthmaker) that makes each truth true.Totality facts and absence entities multiply ontological commitments beyond what...Without truthmakers for negative truths, correspondence theory becomes incoheren...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit