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 Flint and Freddoso's analysis shows D3 covertly smuggles in a Humean regularity assumption: that all causally producible states are type-repeatable across possible agents.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Type-repeatability across agents follows from the identity conditions of causally producible states, not a hidden Humean assumption.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.D3 can accommodate agent-specific causal powers while maintaining universality through comparative modal facts about what each agent can produce.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Flint and Freddoso conflate logical entailment of repeatability with covert smuggling-in; D3 theorists explicitly endorse this consequence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.D3 requires that any agent capable of producing state S could produce it in relevantly similar circumstances, suggesting type-repeatability.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Without assuming type-repeatable states across agents, causal laws become agent-relative, undermining D3's objectivity and universality.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Flint and Freddoso's textual analysis identifies passages where D3 theorists implicitly quantify over possible agents with identical causal powers.
      ?

      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.