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 Events conceived as facts or fact-like particulars are fine-grained entities that cannot be freely re-described or re-identified under different conceptualizations.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Davidson's extensionalist semantics shows that event identity is governed by causal roles, not propositional content or conceptualization.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the same causal nexus underlies 'the stabbing' and 'the killing,' these are one event regardless of how propositions carve them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, events resist fine-grained individuation even when the descriptions corresponding to them are logically non-equivalent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kim's property-exemplification account, though fine-grained, still permits re-identification when the same constituent triple recurs across different linguistic framings.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Logical non-equivalence of propositions does not entail distinctness of the underlying property, object, and time constituting the event.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Facts corresponding to non-equivalent propositions are distinct from one another.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If events are assimilated to facts, events inherit the distinctness conditions of facts.
      ?

      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.