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
    Determinate opponent incompatibility is explained by Arms... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Modality & Possibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Determinate opponent incompatibility is explained by Armstrong's partial identity account of determinate resemblance.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.On Armstrong's account, resemblance between determinate universals is constituted by partial identity — greater resemblance corresponds to greater degree of identity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Determinate lengths are constituted by sums of unit length universals.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.An object's length cannot be identical to two different sums of unit lengths simultaneously.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Armstrong's partial identity account requires determinate universals to be mereological sums of unit universals, but this commits to a highly contentious structural realism about quantities.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Mereological composition of universals generates Bradley's regress: the relation binding unit universals into a sum itself requires explanation, deferring rather than grounding incompatibility.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The incompatibility of determinates under a determinable (e.g., red vs. blue) resists reduction to mereological non-overlap, since color universals lack plausible unit-universal decompositions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Logical incompatibility between determinates can be stipulated as a primitive necessary truth without appeal to partial identity, as Johansson and others in the neo-Aristotelian tradition argue.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If determinate incompatibility is already a conceptual datum about determinable-determinate structure, Armstrong's partial identity account is explanatorily idle rather than genuinely explanatory.
      ?

      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.

    Topics

    Modality & PossibilityTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Causation3 linked

    Related

    An object's length cannot be identical to two different sums of unit lengths sim...Armstrong's partial identity account requires determinate universals to be mereo...Determinate lengths are constituted by sums of unit length universals.If determinate incompatibility is already a conceptual datum about determinable-...
    +5 moreShow less
    Logical incompatibility between determinates can be stipulated as a primitive ne...Mereological composition of universals generates Bradley's regress: the relation...On Armstrong's account, resemblance between determinate universals is constitute...The incompatibility of determinates under a determinable (e.g., red vs. blue) re...Therefore, a single object cannot instantiate two incompatible determinate lengt...

    Similar

    Armstrong's partial identity account of determinate resemblance cannot...86%On Armstrong's account, resemblance between determinate universals is ...84%On Armstrong's account, resemblance between determinate universals is ...84%Armstrong's account explains determinate resemblance via partial ident...83%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: determinate-determinables
    View source passageHide passage
    One concern with anti-realist accounts has to do with the source of classification of determinates under a determinable term or concept. As above, this is usually taken to involve inexact resemblance, but if inexact resemblance is primitive, then objections of the sort leveled against resemblance nominalist treatments of inexact resemblance may arise, mutatis mutandis (see Fales [1990: 117–20] for discussion, and Rodriguez-Pereyra [2002] for a recent response). An alternative means of classifica
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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