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 It is impossible that nothing exists.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The S5 axiom's accessibility relation between possible worlds is itself a metaphysical posit that requires existing modal structure to obtain.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If nothing exists, no modal framework exists to ground inter-world accessibility, so S5 cannot be invoked from within the null hypothesis.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The argument thus smuggles in an existing logical space as a background condition, begging the question against absolute nothingness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.David Lewis's modal realism treats possible worlds as concrete existents, meaning 'possible states of affairs' already presupposes a populated ontology of worlds.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.On deflationary modal views like Sider's or Rosen's, modal truths are primitive or grounded in actual-world structure, not free-floating necessities.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore P5's claim that S is 'necessarily possible across all worlds' assumes a robust realist modal ontology that is itself contested and cannot be presupposed.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Suppose nothing exists. Then no actual states of affairs exist.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If no actual states of affairs exist, no merely possible states of affairs exist, since there is nothing to actualize them or bring them about.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Hence, if nothing exists, there are no possible states of affairs at all.
      ?

      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.