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 Representing two objects as bearing a spatial relation to one another presupposes representing those objects as being in space.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Relational properties can be primitive and irreducible: 'A is 5 meters from B' need not entail A or B being located within a background space.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Leibniz's relational theory of space holds that space is constructed from spatial relations, not presupposed by them, making the claim circular.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If space is nothing over and above the totality of spatial relations, then representing a spatial relation is constitutive of space, not dependent on it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Cognitive science and perceptual psychology (e.g., Shepard's work on apparent motion) suggest spatial relations between objects are computed before a unified spatial framework is represented.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the perceptual system represents relative position and distance as prior outputs from which global spatial structure is inferred, then spatial relations are psychologically and representationally prior to embedding space.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.To represent A and B as being some distance apart, one must represent A and B as located within space.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Representing a distance relation between two objects is not analogous to representing a non-spatial relation like 'brighter than', which does not require embedding objects in a larger brightness space.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Spatial relations, unlike brightness relations, require the objects to be situated within a common spatial 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.