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
    Cartesian reciprocity of transfer does not satisfy strict... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Modality & Possibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Cartesian reciprocity of transfer does not satisfy strict relationism in all cases, only for bodies actually undergoing translation.

    CausationModality & Possibility
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    2 reasons for
    1 reason against

    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.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Descartes explicitly defines motion in Principles II.25 as translation relative to immediately contiguous bodies, making rest a limiting case of zero translation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A limiting case of a relational quantity preserves the relational framework rather than introducing an absolute intrinsic property, as Leibniz's analysis of infinitesimals demonstrates.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, rest in Cartesian physics is a degenerate relational state defined by contiguous neighborhood invariance, not an absolute state violating relationism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Mach's relational mechanics permits asymmetric dynamical descriptions while remaining relationist, since relations need not be globally symmetric to be ontologically relational.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Cartesian reciprocity of transfer applies the relational framework precisely where kinematic content exists—namely, during actual translation—leaving quiescent bodies outside the transfer rule's domain without positing absolute rest.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Restricting a relational principle to cases where the relevant relata obtain is a standard logical move, not evidence that the principle fails relationism in the domain it governs.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Descartes holds that rest and motion are different bodily states.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A strict relationism regarding motion requires that individual bodily states of rest or motion not exist.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Holding that rest and motion are different bodily states is incompatible with strict relationism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Topics

    Modality & PossibilityCausation

    Related

    A limiting case of a relational quantity preserves the relational framework rath...A strict relationism regarding motion requires that individual bodily states of ...Cartesian reciprocity of transfer applies the relational framework precisely whe...Descartes explicitly defines motion in Principles II.25 as translation relative ...
    +6 moreShow less
    Descartes holds that rest and motion are different bodily states.Holding that rest and motion are different bodily states is incompatible with st...Mach's relational mechanics permits asymmetric dynamical descriptions while rema...Restricting a relational principle to cases where the relevant relata obtain is ...Therefore, Cartesian reciprocity of transfer satisfies relationism only when a t...Therefore, rest in Cartesian physics is a degenerate relational state defined by...

    Similar

    Therefore, Cartesian reciprocity of transfer satisfies relationism onl...94%Descartes' account of motion supports the 'reciprocity of transfer': t...84%Descartes' reciprocity of transfer thesis is more likely intended to c...83%Descartes' reciprocity of transfer thesis must be abandoned for weaker...82%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: descartes-physics
    View source passageHide passage
    Nevertheless, Descartes’ hypothesis of motion may sanction a species of relative motion, since his phrase, “considered at rest”, implies that the choice of which bodies are at rest or in motion is purely arbitrary. According to the “relational” theory (or at least the more strict versions of relationism), space, time, and motion are just relations among bodies, and not separately existing entities or properties that are in any way independent of material bodies. Motion only exists as a “relative
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit