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 Kripke's a posteriori necessary truths, such as 'water is H2O,' are necessary yet their necessity cannot be recovered through conceptual analysis of the terms 'water' or 'H2O' alone.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.If the necessity of 'water is H2O' is genuinely irreducible to conceptual analysis, it becomes unclear what 'necessity' means epistemically.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The distinction between conceptual and metaphysical necessity may collapse once we recognize that all identity claims ultimately depend on how we individuate objects.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Conceptual analysis reveals only what speakers mean by terms, not the actual nature of what those terms refer to in the world.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Scientific discovery of 'water is H2O' required empirical investigation beyond linguistic competence, showing necessity transcends conceptual analysis.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Rigid designation theory explains how 'water' and 'H2O' refer to the same substance necessarily despite different conceptual content.
      ?

      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.