Independent (non-internal) relations cannot serve as the relating relation between A and B, because no number of further independent relations can achieve genuine relatedness.

Causation Modality & Possibility

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

0 reasons for

1 reason against

Reasons Against

1 perspective

Reason against

1.If a relation R is 'something to the qualities' (i.e., something to A and B), then R must itself be something — that is, R is an independent, non-internal relation.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.Bradley's Regress 1 demonstrates that independent relations cannot relate their relata, and adding further independent relations does not resolve the problem.
?
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.

Source

AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid

SEP: bradley-regress

View source passage

In this regress, Bradley is employing the phrases “being nothing to the qualities” and “being something to the qualities,” but he doesn’t explain what he means by these phrases. If, however, Bradley is to be consistent with his previous claims, relations that are “nothing to the qualities” have to be his internalB relations which he dismissed with Regress 2, and relations that are “something to the qualities” have to be his “independent” relations which he dismissed with Regress 1. We should thu

Extraction notes

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

Details

Type: claim
Perspectives: 1 (0 for, 1 against)
Edits: 1 edit