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
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Negative truths (e.g., 'there are no unicorns') have no plausible candidate entity to serve as their truthmaker.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The absence of unicorns from our world is a genuine feature of reality that explains why 'no unicorns exist' is true.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Rejecting truthmakers for negatives makes truth a non-relational property, severing the intuitive connection between truth and reality.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Facts about fundamental physical laws and initial conditions constitute truthmakers for negative claims without requiring infinite entities.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Truthmakers must be concrete entities that positively exist; absences and lacks are not concrete entities.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If negative truths had truthmakers, we'd need infinite entities to make all true negations—an implausible ontology.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Positive facts about what exists can explain negative truths without requiring negative truthmakers as primitives.
      ?

      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.