Because necessary co-existence does not imply mutual ontological dependence, a criterion based on metaphysical entailment systematically conflates genuinely required posits with merely co-necessary but explanatorily idle ones.
?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.
Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.
When two things can only exist if they depend on each other—neither can exist without the other. They're locked together in existence.
Ontological
"Ontological" refers to questions about what actually exists or is real. It's concerned with the fundamental nature of being—asking "What kinds of things are there?" rather than "How do we know about them?" For example, an ontological question might be whether numbers, ideas, or God actually exist as real things, or if they're just human inventions.
posits(Reichenbach's later view on induction)
Claims made without guarantee of truth, used by Reichenbach as a basis for inductive inference when no stronger justification is available