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 Predicative types inherit their representational features from both their actual and possible tokens.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Possible tokens are abstract posits with no causal-representational powers; only actual tokenings generate genuine semantic content.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Invoking merely possible tokens to ground truth-conditions smuggles in irreducibly modal facts, making the account explanatorily circular.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kripke's skeptical argument shows that no fact about past or possible use fixes a unique meaning for an expression, undermining rule-following for types.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If possible tokens cannot determinately instantiate a type's representational rule, they cannot reliably transmit truth-conditions to the type.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Even if no one has ever tokened a proposition, it can have truth-conditions if someone could counterfactually token it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The counterfactual token would have truth-conditions grounded in the world (e.g., a token predicating eloquence of Clinton would be true iff Clinton is eloquent).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, the type inherits its truth-conditions from the possible token.
      ?

      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.