If causal-naturalist accounts of concept formation (as in Quine's naturalized epistemology) are correct, then transcendental necessity and natural necessity cannot be cleanly separated.

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

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Causal-naturalist accounts(as the type of theory being discussed): Explanations that say our concepts and ideas are formed through natural causes—like how our brain responds to things in the world—rather than from pure thinking or divine inspiration.
Concept formation(as the process Dignāga's theory explains): The mental process by which our minds create and develop general ideas or categories (like how we learn the concept of 'furniture' to apply to chairs, tables, and desks).
Natural necessity(Contrasted with the stronger necessity required by transcendental arguments): A form of necessity that holds only within worlds governed by actual laws of nature, allowing for possible worlds where those laws do not hold
Quine(as a proper name referring to the philosopher whose theory is being discussed): Willard Van Orman Quine was a 20th-century American philosopher who wrote about how we know things and how language works. In this statement, we're discussing one of his specific ideas about observation.

Based on where you are in your exploration