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 scarlet determines red, then red does not determine sc... — Carmelics
    Home/Modality & Possibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    If scarlet determines red, then red does not determine scarlet

    CausationModality & Possibility
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Determination is asymmetric
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Red cannot be both less specific and more specific than scarlet simultaneously
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.In Aristotelian genus-species hierarchies, higher genera reciprocally constrain lower species through essential definition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

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

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Asymmetry of specificity does not entail asymmetry of all determination relations if determination encompasses modal constraint, not merely specification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.W.E. Johnson's original determinable framework allowed that determinables contribute irreducible qualitative content not fully captured by their determinates.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If red contributes content that scarlet alone does not supply, red partially determines the qualitative character of scarlet instances, challenging strict one-directional asymmetry.
      ?

      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.

    Topics

    Modality & PossibilityCausation

    Connections

    1 topic

    Truth & Knowledge1 linked

    Related

    Asymmetry of specificity does not entail asymmetry of all determination relation...Determination is asymmetricIf red contributes content that scarlet alone does not supply, red partially det...If red necessarily excludes blue, then possessing red places determinate modal c...
    +3 moreShow less
    In Aristotelian genus-species hierarchies, higher genera reciprocally constrain ...Red cannot be both less specific and more specific than scarlet simultaneouslyW.E. Johnson's original determinable framework allowed that determinables contri...

    Similar

    Determination is asymmetric: if scarlet determines red, red does not d...92%Determination is transitive: scarlet determines red and red determines...90%Anything that is scarlet must be red, but something might be red witho...89%To be scarlet is to be red in a specific way84%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: determinate-determinables
    View source passageHide passage
    These features, characteristic of strict partial orderings, follow just from Increased specificity. For example, scarlet does not determine itself, since no property can be more specific than itself. If scarlet determines red, then red does not determine scarlet, since red cannot be both less and more specific than scarlet. And if to be scarlet is to be red, in a specific way, and to be red is to be colored, in a specific way, then to be scarlet is to be a yet more specific way of being colored,
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit