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 Occurrences are not referentially basic.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Process ontologists like Whitehead hold that events and occurrences are the fundamental constituents of reality, not enduring particulars.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If occurrences are ontologically basic, then referential practices tracking them need not derive from reference to continuants.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Strawson's argument conflates epistemic dependence in language use with metaphysical or referential basicness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Davidson's event semantics grounds causal and action sentences in quantification over events as irreducible particulars in the logical form of language.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If events must be posited as primitive referential objects to capture the logical structure of ordinary causal claims, occurrences have referential autonomy Strawson's view cannot accommodate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Occurrences are standardly picked out dependently — e.g., 'the fire in that house' depends on reference to the house.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Occurrences do not form a structured framework that could ground the spatio-temporal framework.
      ?

      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.