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 Langton and Lewis define intrinsic properties as those shared by all duplicates, but modal properties like 'being such that 2+2=4' are shared by all duplicates trivially.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.If duplicates share modal properties trivially, this reveals the definition captures something real about duplicates, not a definitional flaw.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Excluding trivially shared properties requires an independent account of 'triviality' that isn't circular or question-begging.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Mathematical truths like '2+2=4' are intrinsic to abstract objects; excluding them assumes a non-neutral position on mathematical ontology.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Trivially shared properties depend on logical necessity, not intrinsic nature, so they should be excluded from intrinsic property definitions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A duplicate should share all and only properties grounded in its internal qualitative character, not abstract modal facts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Langton-Lewis accounts distinguish intrinsic from relational by internal independence; modal necessities violate this independence criterion.
      ?

      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.