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
    Metaphysical explanation cannot be understood free from p... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Metaphysical explanation cannot be understood free from pragmatic constraints

    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.Metaphysical explanations are pairs of context-sensitive questions and answers
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The role of context in metaphysical explanation is ineliminable
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Grounding relations obtain mind-independently between entities, regardless of any cognitive agent's explanatory interests or context.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Fine's work on ontological dependence shows metaphysical priority is a feature of reality's structure, not a product of inquiry framing.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If pragmatic constraints were constitutive of grounding, then grounding facts would vary with epistemic communities—an unacceptable form of relativism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Van Inwagen's distinction between metaphysical and scientific explanation preserves an autonomous domain governed by necessity, not contextual salience.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The logical form of 'A in virtue of B' is a binary relation between facts that carries no indexical or context-sensitive components in its truth conditions.
      ?

      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 LanguageTruth & Knowledge

    Related

    Fine's work on ontological dependence shows metaphysical priority is a feature o...Grounding relations obtain mind-independently between entities, regardless of an...If pragmatic constraints were constitutive of grounding, then grounding facts wo...Metaphysical explanations are pairs of context-sensitive questions and answers
    +3 moreShow less
    The logical form of 'A in virtue of B' is a binary relation between facts that c...The role of context in metaphysical explanation is ineliminableVan Inwagen's distinction between metaphysical and scientific explanation preser...

    Similar

    Metaphysical explanation being pragmatic does not imply that metaphysi...82%Genetic explanations are pragmatic, not purely theoretical82%Genetic explanations are in fact pragmatic and context-dependent rathe...80%Whatever cannot be explained violates the Principle of Sufficient Reas...79%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: metaphysical-explanation
    View source passageHide passage
    There has, as of yet, been comparatively little discussion of pragmatic accounts of metaphysical explanation in the literature. One exception is Thompson (2019), who develops an account along the lines described above, where metaphysical explanations are pairs of context-sensitive questions and answers. Because the role of context is ineliminable, there is no sense to be made of a notion of metaphysical explanation free from pragmatic constraints. However, Thompson accounts for the correctness o
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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