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 Soames's account requires that propositions have cognitive or instructional content, not that their ontological realizers must mirror that structure.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Without structural isomorphism between content and realizers, the relationship between them becomes explanatorily mysterious and arbitrary.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If realizers don't mirror propositional structure, it's unclear what grounds propositions' compositional semantics and logical operations.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Soames's account risks collapsing into mere stipulation—declaring content independent of structural facts without explaining how reference is fixed.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Propositions must have representational content to serve their epistemic function of being truth-apt and rationally evaluable.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
The ontological structure of realizers (sets, abstract objects, etc.) need not replicate propositional structure for content to be determinate.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Many successful representational systems (maps, diagrams) convey content despite realizers structurally unlike what they represent.
?
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.