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
    If disjunctive properties lack ontological status, they c... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Disjunctivism accommodates requisite determination

    If disjunctive properties lack ontological status, they cannot ground the real determination relation that determinables require.

    ?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.Real determination requires a determinate ground, but disjunctions (A or B) are indeterminate about which disjunct actually obtains.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Only properties with intrinsic, unified natures can ground the determinate specifications that determinables demand of their instances.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Allowing disjunctive grounders would make any determinable groundable by mere logical combinations, undermining determinable-determinate distinction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Disjunctive properties are ontologically respectable if instantiated: 'red or blue' is genuinely instantiated when something is red.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Determinables can be grounded by multiple distinct determinates; disjunction simply expresses this multi-realizability, which is determinate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The claim conflates epistemic indeterminacy about which disjunct holds with metaphysical indeterminacy of the disjunctive property itself.
      ?

      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

    Causation1 linkedModality & Possibility1 linked

    Related

    Allowing disjunctive grounders would make any determinable groundable by mere lo...Determinables can be grounded by multiple distinct determinates; disjunction sim...Disjunctive properties are ontologically respectable if instantiated: 'red or bl...Disjunctivism accommodates requisite determination
    +3 moreShow less
    Only properties with intrinsic, unified natures can ground the determinate speci...Real determination requires a determinate ground, but disjunctions (A or B) are ...The claim conflates epistemic indeterminacy about which disjunct holds with meta...

    Details

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