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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Filling the redness role is necessary and sufficient for a property to be redness.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.A functional role can in principle be multiply realized by distinct intrinsic properties, making the role insufficient to fix a unique referent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If both Property A and Property B independently fill the redness role across possible worlds, neither is uniquely redness, yet the claim entails each must be.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kripke's modal argument establishes that natural kind terms like 'red' pick out their referents by essential intrinsic nature, not by functional description.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If redness is an essential property fixed by its intrinsic physical constitution, then filling a causal-functional role is neither necessary nor sufficient for being redness across all possible worlds.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The role description 'that property which...' is intended to express a condition that is necessary and sufficient for satisfying the concept of redness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the functional analysis is correct, then all it takes for a property to be redness is for it to fill the redness role.
      ?

      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.
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42