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
    Quiddities can be physically efficacious even if a single... — Carmelics
    Home/Consciousness & Mind
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Quiddities can be physically efficacious even if a single type of physical disposition might have been grounded by a distinct quiddity from the quiddity that actually grounds it

    CausationConsciousness & Mind
    ?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.Causal relations do not in general hold with metaphysical necessity
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.There is no requirement that the relationship between quiddities and dispositions must hold with metaphysical necessity for quiddities to be physically efficacious
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.If quiddities are intrinsic categorical properties with no necessary dispositional profile, they cannot constitute genuine grounds for specific causal powers.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Grounding requires a necessary connection between the ground and what it grounds, so a quiddity that could equally ground any disposition grounds none in particular.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A property that is causally inert in every possible world where it exists cannot become efficacious merely by contingent association with a disposition (cf. Alexander's dictum).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Humean contingency of causal relations applies to causal relata, not to the grounding relation between a property and its causal profile.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Allowing quiddities to contingently ground dispositions collapses into epiphenomenalism about quiddities, since the disposition, not the quiddity, does all explanatory causal work.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.This mirrors Jackson and Chalmers's conceivability arguments: if the same physical dispositions are conceivable without the quiddity, the quiddity adds no causal-explanatory content.
      ?

      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

    Consciousness & MindCausation

    Connections

    1 topic

    Modality & Possibility2 linked

    Related

    A property that is causally inert in every possible world where it exists cannot...Allowing quiddities to contingently ground dispositions collapses into epiphenom...Causal relations do not in general hold with metaphysical necessityGrounding requires a necessary connection between the ground and what it grounds...
    +4 moreShow less
    Humean contingency of causal relations applies to causal relata, not to the grou...If quiddities are intrinsic categorical properties with no necessary disposition...There is no requirement that the relationship between quiddities and disposition...This mirrors Jackson and Chalmers's conceivability arguments: if the same physic...

    Similar

    There is no requirement that the relationship between quiddities and d...85%On Russellian monism, a single type of physical disposition might have...82%The grounding relationship between quiddities and physical disposition...80%Russellian monism entails that quiddities ground physical dispositions...79%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: russellian-monism
    View source passageHide passage
    In response to the first version of that objection, on which quiddities lack physical efficacy, some reject the assumption that any such conclusion follows from the premise that a single type of physical disposition might have been grounded by a distinct quiddity from the quiddity that actually grounds it (Hawthorne 2002, Alter and Coleman forthcoming). Causal relations, it is argued, do not in generally hold with metaphysical necessity. So, why must the relationship between quiddities and dispo
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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