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
    Causal powers ontology (Molnar, Bird) grounds disposition... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Philosophy must revive something like the Aristotelian notion of a substantial form

    Causal powers ontology (Molnar, Bird) grounds dispositional properties in objects without invoking substantial forms as metaphysically primitive.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Causal powers avoid positing substantial forms by grounding dispositions in intrinsic properties objects actually possess.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.This approach preserves dispositional realism while maintaining parsimony—no multiply realized essences needed.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Powers explain why objects behave as they do without retreating to mysterious intrinsic natures independent of causation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Grounding dispositions in causal powers merely relocates the problem—what grounds the powers themselves if not substantial forms?
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The claim that powers avoid invoking substantial forms is undermined if powers are themselves treated as primitive metaphysical features.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Without appeal to intrinsic categorical bases, causal powers risk collapsing into bare dispositionalism, leaving objects explanatorily hollow.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    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.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Causation1 linkedModality & Possibility1 linked

    Related

    Causal powers avoid positing substantial forms by grounding dispositions in intr...Grounding dispositions in causal powers merely relocates the problem—what ground...Philosophy must revive something like the Aristotelian notion of a substantial f...Powers explain why objects behave as they do without retreating to mysterious in...
    +3 moreShow less
    The claim that powers avoid invoking substantial forms is undermined if powers a...This approach preserves dispositional realism while maintaining parsimony—no mul...Without appeal to intrinsic categorical bases, causal powers risk collapsing int...

    Details

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