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 space has no genuine parts, then 'contact with a neare... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→The best explanation of spatial separation (A being nearer to D than F) is that D is in contact with a nearer part of space than F

    If space has no genuine parts, then 'contact with a nearer part of space' is an explanatory fiction that cannot ground real distinctions in proximity.

    ?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.If space is fundamental and indivisible, appeals to 'parts of space' invoke non-existent entities that cannot do explanatory work.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Proximity distinctions require a basis in real structure; fictional parts lack the ontological weight to ground genuine physical differences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Explanatory fictions are useful heuristics but cannot constitute the truthmakers for claims about which objects are actually closer.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Space can lack intrinsic parts yet admit real structural relations; proximity could be fundamental and non-reducible to mereological composition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Many successful scientific explanations rely on theoretically useful distinctions that don't require ontological commitment to all posited entities.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The argument conflates 'having no genuine parts' with 'having no real geometric structure'—these are distinct metaphysical claims.
      ?

      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 linkedPerception1 linked

    Related

    Explanatory fictions are useful heuristics but cannot constitute the truthmakers...If space is fundamental and indivisible, appeals to 'parts of space' invoke non-...Many successful scientific explanations rely on theoretically useful distinction...Proximity distinctions require a basis in real structure; fictional parts lack t...
    +3 moreShow less
    Space can lack intrinsic parts yet admit real structural relations; proximity co...The argument conflates 'having no genuine parts' with 'having no real geometric ...The best explanation of spatial separation (A being nearer to D than F) is that ...

    Details

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