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

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 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 for 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

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.