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 Σ^B₁-definability is a syntactic criterion, but polynomial-time computability is an extensional, machine-relative notion—Benacerraf's identification problem applies here.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Both Σ^B₁-definability and polynomial-time computability are model-independent in practice; they're equivalent across standard formalizations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The distinction between 'syntactic' and 'extensional' is itself unclear—syntax is extensionally defined as well-formed symbol sequences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Benacerraf's problem concerns abstract objects' identity, not reducibility; computational/logical notions don't involve the same epistemic gaps.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Σ^B₁-formulas are purely syntactic; their truth depends only on logical structure, independent of physical implementation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Polynomial-time computability varies across machine models (Turing machines, circuits, quantum); it lacks the invariance of syntax.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Benacerraf showed syntactic and extensional criteria can diverge; identifying them requires bridging distinct ontological categories.
      ?

      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.