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
    Disjunctivism accommodates requisite determination — Carmelics
    Home/Modality & Possibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Disjunctivism accommodates requisite determination

    CausationModality & Possibility
    ?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.Instancing a disjunctive property requires instancing one of its disjuncts
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Requisite determination holds that a determinate must be instanced for its determinable to be instanced
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Requisite determination demands that determinates and determinables share qualitative content in a specific exclusion structure, as Yablo's 1992 analysis shows.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Disjuncts of a disjunctive property need share no common qualitative nature, so instancing a disjunct fails to replicate the determinable-determinate content relation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore disjunctivism mimics the logical form of determination without capturing its essential metaphysical character.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Disjunctive properties are not genuine properties but merely nominal groupings, as Armstrong argued in 'Universals and Scientific Realism'.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If disjunctive properties lack ontological status, they cannot ground the real determination relation that determinables require.
      ?

      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 & PossibilityCausation

    Related

    Disjunctive properties are not genuine properties but merely nominal groupings, ...Disjuncts of a disjunctive property need share no common qualitative nature, so ...If disjunctive properties lack ontological status, they cannot ground the real d...Instancing a disjunctive property requires instancing one of its disjuncts
    +3 moreShow less
    Requisite determination demands that determinates and determinables share qualit...Requisite determination holds that a determinate must be instanced for its deter...Therefore disjunctivism mimics the logical form of determination without capturi...

    Similar

    A requisite is a necessary condition80%All of a thing's requisites (necessary conditions) constitute a thing'...75%A determination rule specifies that the value of Q is determined by th...73%If something exists, then all of its requisites have been posited73%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: determinate-determinables
    View source passageHide passage
    Disjunctivism explains several features of determination: Requisite determination is accommodated since the instancing of a disjunction requires the instancing of a disjunct; Determinable inheritance is accommodated since the instancing of a disjunct entails the instancing of any associated disjunctions (see Rodriguez-Pereyra 2002, Massin 2013); Causal compatibility is accommodated via the identity of determinable (disjunctive) and determinate (disjunct) instances. And while disjunctivism violat
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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