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 If coherent conceivability of absence suffices to disqualify TIN status, contingent mathematical instantiations (e.g., a triangle drawn in sand) would falsely disqualify triangularity itself as a TIN.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The sand-triangle's conceivable absence shows that what we call 'triangularity' here depends on physical conditions, suggesting triangularity itself is contingent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If triangularity were genuinely necessary in itself, there should be no coherent scenario where triangular properties vanish, even in principle.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Distinguishing the property from instances doesn't resolve the problem; both share a causal dependence on contingent physical or mental substrates.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Triangularity as a property persists despite contingent instantiations; the concept's necessity shouldn't collapse from instances' contingency.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Conceivability of absence applies to token instances (this sand-triangle), not to the abstract property itself, so it's a category mistake to conflate them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If contingent manifestations disqualified TIN status, no mathematical property could be TIN, making the distinction metaphysically incoherent.
      ?

      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.