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
    Motion, under strict relationism, exists only as a relati... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Modality & Possibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Motion, under strict relationism, exists only as a relative difference among bodies rather than as an individual, determinate property of each body.

    CausationModality & Possibility
    ?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.According to the relational theory, space, time, and motion are just relations among bodies and not separately existing entities or properties independent of material bodies.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.All that really exists is a difference in relative speed, velocity, and acceleration among bodies, not individual speed properties possessed by each body.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Newton's rotating bucket argument demonstrates that concave water-surface curvature persists even when no relative motion between water and bucket exists.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If motion were purely relational, no mechanical effect could distinguish absolute rotation from rest, yet centrifugal effects empirically appear.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, at least some motions must be grounded in something beyond pairwise body-relations, undermining strict relationism's completeness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Leibniz's own dynamics required attributing living force (vis viva) intrinsically to individual bodies, not merely to body-pairs in relation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A quantity that is conserved within a single body across interactions cannot be coherently defined as a purely relational difference between bodies.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Strict relationism thus conflicts with the very dynamical framework its most sophisticated early defender used to ground physical explanation.
      ?

      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

    Modality & PossibilityCausation

    Related

    A quantity that is conserved within a single body across interactions cannot be ...According to the relational theory, space, time, and motion are just relations a...All that really exists is a difference in relative speed, velocity, and accelera...If motion were purely relational, no mechanical effect could distinguish absolut...
    +4 moreShow less
    Leibniz's own dynamics required attributing living force (vis viva) intrinsicall...Newton's rotating bucket argument demonstrates that concave water-surface curvat...Strict relationism thus conflicts with the very dynamical framework its most sop...Therefore, at least some motions must be grounded in something beyond pairwise b...

    Similar

    A strict relationism regarding motion requires that individual bodily ...81%Crescas instead distinguishes properties from matter alone, not from b...79%A relation can hold between two things of completely different natures78%All that really exists is a difference in relative speed, velocity, an...78%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: descartes-physics
    View source passageHide passage
    Nevertheless, Descartes’ hypothesis of motion may sanction a species of relative motion, since his phrase, “considered at rest”, implies that the choice of which bodies are at rest or in motion is purely arbitrary. According to the “relational” theory (or at least the more strict versions of relationism), space, time, and motion are just relations among bodies, and not separately existing entities or properties that are in any way independent of material bodies. Motion only exists as a “relative
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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