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
    If a posit is eliminable without loss of explanatory powe... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Expression types such as 'red' exist

    If a posit is eliminable without loss of explanatory power, ontological commitment to it is not genuinely incurred.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Ontological commitment means we believe entities exist; if we can explain everything without positing them, we lack grounds for belief.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Occam's Razor is a fundamental epistemic principle: multiply entities only when necessary for explanation, not for convenience.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If two theories have identical explanatory power, choosing the one with fewer ontological commitments is more rational and parsimonious.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Eliminability is theory-relative: a posit eliminated in one framework may be indispensable in another equally valid one.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Explanatory power alone doesn't determine ontological commitment; pragmatic usefulness can justify positing entities we have no reason to believe exist.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Mathematical entities (sets, numbers) are arguably eliminable in some frameworks but seem genuinely necessary for coherent quantitative science.
      ?

      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.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedPhilosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    Eliminability is theory-relative: a posit eliminated in one framework may be ind...Explanatory power alone doesn't determine ontological commitment; pragmatic usef...Expression types such as 'red' existIf two theories have identical explanatory power, choosing the one with fewer on...
    +3 moreShow less
    Mathematical entities (sets, numbers) are arguably eliminable in some frameworks...Occam's Razor is a fundamental epistemic principle: multiply entities only when ...Ontological commitment means we believe entities exist; if we can explain everyt...

    Details

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