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 On a dispositional reading (cf. Mumford, Molnar), causal activation of a disposition does not entail the disposition was absent before activation.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
If dispositions require no manifestation conditions for existence, their identity and individuation become indeterminate and unfalsifiable.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
The distinction between 'having a disposition' and 'manifesting a disposition' requires independent criteria, but none are empirically accessible.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Parsimony favors identifying dispositions with their conditional manifestation patterns rather than positing unobservable pre-activation entities.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Dispositions are categorical properties grounded in intrinsic physical states that persist whether or not they are currently manifesting.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Activation merely triggers manifestation of an existing disposition; it doesn't create the disposition's underlying physical basis.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Objects retain their dispositional properties across time regardless of environmental stimuli, supporting pre-existence during dormancy.
?
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.