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
    Both 'can' claims are true under their respective context... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Modality & Possibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→A time traveler is able to retro-kill their younger self in one sense but unable to do so in another sense, and these claims are compatible.

    Both 'can' claims are true under their respective contextual readings.

    All sources support itModality & Possibility
    ?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.

    Topics

    Modality & PossibilityAll sources support it

    Connections

    2 topics

    Causation2 linked

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Modality & Possibility
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Moral Responsibility
    1 linked

    Related

    A time traveler is able to retro-kill their younger self in one sense but unable...Relative to the set of facts concerning the actual past (the time traveler's you...Relative to the set of facts concerning the time traveler's physical capacities ...

    Similar

    The consistency paradox arises from equivocating between two different...77%Ability ascriptions such as 'S is able to A' are possibility claims, t...76%'May' does not entail 'can' in the way 'ought' does.75%There is no principle that 'may' implies 'can' analogous to 'ought imp...74%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: causation-backwards
    View source passageHide passage
    A way out of the paradox was suggested by David Lewis (1976) who argued that the ability of killing somebody should be understood as a possibility compossible with the relevant fact. As an opera singer, for example, you are able to sing operas, since you have the physical capacity and training to do so, but because of a temporary loss of voice, you cannot hum a single tune. What you can do relative to one set of facts, is something you cannot do relative to another set of facts. This contextual

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective