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 Kit Fine and David Lewis both treat modal truths as law-like regularities capable of grounding explanatory entailment.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Fine's truthmaker semantics and Lewis's modal realism actually diverge fundamentally on what grounds modal facts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Reducing modality to regularities struggles to explain necessary truths that hold across all possible worlds trivially.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Law-like regularities themselves require modal explanation (why these laws, not others?), creating regress rather than grounding.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Both Fine and Lewis reject Platonism about abstract possible worlds, grounding modality in concrete structures or facts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Law-like regularities provide determinate truthmakers for modal claims, avoiding vacuous or brute modal facts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Treating modality as grounded in regularities explains why modal truths support counterfactual reasoning and scientific explanation.
      ?

      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