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
    Material bodies (in a broad sense) are the basic items of... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Material bodies (in a broad sense) are the basic items of reference.

    Philosophy of Language
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.There is a basic category of items of reference.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The candidates for referential basicness, after setting aside theoretical entities and experiences, are material bodies and occurrences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Occurrences are not referentially basic because they are picked out dependently and do not ground the spatio-temporal framework.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Events, not substances, are the primary ontological constituents of reality, as argued by Whitehead's process philosophy and Davidson's event ontology.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If events are ontologically primary, the referential framework is grounded in occurrences, undermining Strawson's dismissal of them as dependent particulars.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Davidson's anomalous monism shows events can bear causal and spatio-temporal relations sufficient to anchor reference without appeal to enduring material bodies.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Quine's ontological relativity demonstrates that what counts as a 'basic' object of reference is always relative to a background theory, not an absolute metaphysical fact.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If referential basicness is theory-relative, Strawson's claim that material bodies are privileged presupposes a folk-physical framework rather than establishing a language-independent truth.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Philosophy of Language

    Connections

    1 topic

    Perception1 linked

    Related

    Davidson's anomalous monism shows events can bear causal and spatio-temporal rel...Events, not substances, are the primary ontological constituents of reality, as ...If events are ontologically primary, the referential framework is grounded in oc...If referential basicness is theory-relative, Strawson's claim that material bodi...
    +5 moreShow less
    Material bodies do form a structured spatio-temporal framework and are not simil...Occurrences are not referentially basic because they are picked out dependently ...Quine's ontological relativity demonstrates that what counts as a 'basic' object...The candidates for referential basicness, after setting aside theoretical entiti...There is a basic category of items of reference.

    Similar

    There is a basic category of items of reference.82%The candidates for referential basicness, after setting aside theoreti...77%Descartes defines a body as everything which is simultaneously transpo...77%Descartes then defines body as everything which is simultaneously tran...76%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: strawson
    View source passageHide passage
    How should we think of these descriptive relations? Strawson claims in chapter 1 that these descriptive relations are fundamentally spatio-temporal. That is, my ability to think of James I rests on thinking of him as the person ascending the throne in 1603, the present time being 2018. Ultimately I fix on him via his place in a spatio-temporal framework which is centred on my currently perceived environment. Strawson further points out that since we need to update this relational framework over
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit