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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that In physics, the questions 'whether X is' and 'what X is' both ask for any kind of cause of X's existing, including extrinsic efficient or final causes.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Aristotle's Posterior Analytics distinguishes definitional 'what is it' questions from causal 'why is it' questions as logically prior and independent inquiries.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A definition specifying essential attributes of X can be complete and scientifically adequate without reference to extrinsic efficient or final causes of X's existence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Conflating definitional and causal questions risks circular explanation, since extrinsic causes presuppose the prior identification of the definable entity they act upon.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kant's critical philosophy establishes that efficient causation is a category of the understanding applied to appearances, not a constitutive feature of physical definitions of natural kinds.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If 'what X is' necessarily invokes extrinsic efficient causes, then definitions of natural kinds would be observer-relative and indexed to contingent causal histories rather than expressing necessary properties.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Physical science seeks causal explanations of phenomena.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Physical causes include causes internal and external to X, such as extrinsic efficient or final causes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.An extrinsic cause, such as the earth blocking sunlight from reaching the moon, can be incorporated into a physical definition (as in the case of eclipse).
      ?

      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.
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42