Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Mutual existential dependence between two entities does not entail ontological equality between them.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
If two entities are truly mutually dependent for existence, denying their equality seems to arbitrarily privilege one over the other.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Asymmetrical ontological status between mutually dependent entities requires independent justification beyond mere dependence itself.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Symmetrical dependence relationships (A needs B; B needs A equally) better explain mutual dependence than hierarchical ontologies.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Dependence concerns causal or existential necessity; equality concerns metaphysical status. These are logically distinct categories.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
A part and whole mutually depend on each other, yet possess different ontological categories and structural properties.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Parent and child exhibit mutual dependence (child needs parent; parent's identity shaped by parenthood) without equal metaphysical standing.
?
How convincing is this?
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.