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 Kulvicki's dispositional theory accounts for distal intuitions about sounds, particularly the role of action in producing auditory information about objects.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Casey O'Callaghan argues that sounds are particular events or processes located at their sources, not dispositions of objects to resist manipulation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Dispositional properties are general and repeatable features of objects, whereas sounds are unrepeatable dated particulars—making the ontological category mismatch a foundational objection.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Kulvicki's account conflates the causal basis for sound production with the ontological nature of sound itself, committing a category error that echoes debates in philosophy of color.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Many significant sound sources—thunder, wind, flowing water—are produced without any deliberate agent imparting a thwack, undermining the action-centered account.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A dispositional theory grounded in thwacking cannot generalize to natural sounds, revealing it as a parochial account of artifact perception rather than a theory of sound.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Most objects produce sound because agents deliberately impart a thwack on them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.When an agent hears a sound, the agent gains knowledge of the elastic resistance an object opposes to thwacking.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The more an object reacts to thwacking, the more sonorous the object is.
      ?

      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