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 red necessarily excludes blue, then possessing red pla... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→If scarlet determines red, then red does not determine scarlet

    If red necessarily excludes blue, then possessing red places determinate modal constraints on what scarlet can be, constituting a form of reverse determination.

    ?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.Modal constraints are bidirectional: if red excludes blue, then blue-possession constrains red-possibilities symmetrically.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Scarlet's ontological status as red-adjacent means red's modal profile directly determines scarlet's possible states.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Reverse determination explains why color exclusions aren't merely negative facts but actively structure nearby properties.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Red-blue exclusion is a direct relation; scarlet's constraints follow only indirectly through its own color-exclusions, not reverse determination.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Scarlet can possess red-components while respecting red-blue exclusion—no special reverse constraint mechanism is needed.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Calling this 'reverse determination' obscures that we're merely applying standard modal logic to overlapping property-sets.
      ?

      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

    Calling this 'reverse determination' obscures that we're merely applying standar...If scarlet determines red, then red does not determine scarletModal constraints are bidirectional: if red excludes blue, then blue-possession ...Red-blue exclusion is a direct relation; scarlet's constraints follow only indir...
    +3 moreShow less
    Reverse determination explains why color exclusions aren't merely negative facts...Scarlet can possess red-components while respecting red-blue exclusion—no specia...Scarlet's ontological status as red-adjacent means red's modal profile directly ...

    Details

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