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
    Necessary truths and contingent truths can be distinguish... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Modality & Possibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Necessary truths and contingent truths can be distinguished while maintaining that all truths are analytic.

    Modality & PossibilityTruth & Knowledge
    ?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.Analysis is the process of replacing the terms of a proposition with definitions or partial definitions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A demonstration results when an identity is obtained through analysis in a finite number of steps.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.All and only necessary truths have a finite demonstration by analysis.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.An infinite analysis that never terminates cannot ground a truth as knowable or demonstrable by any finite mind, including God's complete concept.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If contingent truths require infinite analysis to resolve, they cannot be 'analytic' in any epistemically or logically meaningful sense, only in a stipulative one.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A distinction that collapses the analytic/synthetic boundary into merely finite vs. infinite steps abandons the categorical difference Kant identified between relations of ideas and matters of fact.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kripke's a posteriori necessary truths, such as 'water is H2O,' are necessary yet their necessity cannot be recovered through conceptual analysis of the terms 'water' or 'H2O' alone.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If some necessary truths are grounded in metaphysical identity rather than conceptual containment, then the finite-demonstration criterion for necessity fails to capture the correct extension of necessary truths.
      ?

      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 & PossibilityTruth & Knowledge

    Related

    A demonstration results when an identity is obtained through analysis in a finit...A distinction that collapses the analytic/synthetic boundary into merely finite ...All and only contingent truths do not have a demonstration by analysis in a fini...All and only necessary truths have a finite demonstration by analysis.
    +5 moreShow less
    An infinite analysis that never terminates cannot ground a truth as knowable or ...Analysis is the process of replacing the terms of a proposition with definitions...If contingent truths require infinite analysis to resolve, they cannot be 'analy...If some necessary truths are grounded in metaphysical identity rather than conce...Kripke's a posteriori necessary truths, such as 'water is H2O,' are necessary ye...

    Similar

    If there are no contradictory contingent facts, then the Principle of ...85%All necessary truths are analytic85%Without a distinction between contingent and necessary truths, every f...84%The Principle of Noncontradiction applies to all contingent truths as ...84%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: sufficient-reason
    View source passageHide passage
    In response to this worry, Leibniz develops an account of contingency in terms of infinite analysis.[8] Leibniz understands analysis as the process of replacing the terms of a proposition with definitions or partial definitions. A demonstration results when an identity is obtained through the process of analysis in a finite number of steps. Leibniz claims that all and only necessary truths have a finite demonstration by analysis and all and only contingent truths do not have a demonstration by
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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