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 the relevance relation constitutively shapes what causal facts obtain in a context, then contrastivism about explanation entails a form of contrastivism about causation itself.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Causal facts (what causes what) are mind-independent; relevance relations are epistemic and context-dependent. They need not align.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Contrastive explanation selects from fixed causal facts; it doesn't constitute them. Relevance shapes *which* facts we cite, not what obtains.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Even if relevance shapes explanatory contrastivism, explanation and causation are distinct phenomena—one is epistemic, one is metaphysical.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Explanation and causation share a common logical structure: both require selecting relevant factors from infinite possibilities.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If context determines which factors are explanatorily relevant, and explanation tracks causal facts, then context must determine causal facts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Denying contrastivism about causation while accepting it for explanation creates an unjustified asymmetry between explanation and causation.
      ?

      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.