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 David Lewis's modal realism treats possible worlds as concrete existents, meaning 'possible states of affairs' already presupposes a populated ontology of worlds.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Positing infinitely many concrete worlds with unobservable causal isolation is ontologically extravagant beyond explanatory necessity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Modal realism struggles to explain why actuality is privileged if all worlds are equally real and concrete.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Possible worlds can be analyzed as mathematical structures or logical constructs, avoiding commitment to concrete parallel universes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Modal talk ('possibly', 'necessarily') is ubiquitous in science and ordinary language, requiring genuine metaphysical grounding.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Concrete worlds explain modality without reducing it to linguistic convention or epistemic limitation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Rival theories (abstract possible worlds, properties-based accounts) face their own ontological commitments equally burdensome.
      ?

      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.