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 relation R that 'relates' a and b must itself stand in a further relating-relation to a and b, generating an infinite regress regardless of R's ontological status.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Relations can be fundamentally non-relational: a property of ordered pairs (a,b) requires no further 'relating' to obtain.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The regress assumes relating-relations differ in kind from base relations; treating all uniformly dissolves the problem.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Not all conceptual distinctions (relation vs. its relata) generate metaphysical demands for additional entities bridging them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Relations are genuine entities that must connect relata; connection itself requires a mediating factor between distinct things.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Any mediating factor between a, b, and R itself needs mediation, creating a regress that cannot terminate without special pleading.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Denying the regress requires positing brute facts or primitive relations, which abandons explanatory completeness.
      ?

      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.