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 Descartes' physics is difficult to reconcile with a strict relational theory of space and motion.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Descartes' own definition of motion in Principles II.25 is explicitly relational: motion is transfer relative to immediately contiguous bodies.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Daniel Garber and Dennis Des Chene have shown that Descartes' collision rules can be reinterpreted as governing reciprocal transfer within contiguous neighborhoods without invoking absolute space.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The appearance of requiring external frames arises from conflating Descartes' kinematic definition of motion with his dynamical force concepts, which are analytically separable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Ernst Mach's relational mechanics demonstrates that inertial effects can be grounded in relations to the distribution of all matter, not absolute space, suggesting relationism has more resources than the supporting arguments acknowledge.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Descartes' plenum entails that every body is always in contact with surrounding bodies, making the contiguous neighborhood relation physically exhaustive and thus sufficient for specifying all motions without remainder.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Applying Descartes' collision rules requires an external reference frame to determine whether bodies are approaching one another.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A strict relational theory of space and motion does not permit recourse to external reference frames beyond local contiguous neighborhoods.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Descartes' reciprocity of transfer thesis must be abandoned for weaker relationist or absolutist interpretations to work.
      ?

      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.