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
    Some explanations exceed mere brute-fact postulates witho... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Consciousness & Mind
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→There need not be a conceptual path from concepts or predicates of the reducing science to concepts or predicates of the reduced science for an explanation to count as a reduction.

    Some explanations exceed mere brute-fact postulates without achieving the tight conceptual connections required by those who demand an a priori link between the reduced and reducing science.

    Consciousness & MindTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Consciousness & MindTruth & Knowledge

    Key Terms

    Conceptual connections(as the links between thought-elements)
    The logical relationships between ideas—how certain concepts depend on or relate to each other, like how 'parent' connects to 'child.'
    a priori(Frege treats 'analytic' as entailing 'a priori' for arithmetic.)
    Knowable independently of empirical experience; here treated as a consequence of analyticity.
    brute-fact postulates

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Consciousness & Mind
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    (as used in philosophy of science and explanation)
    Basic facts that are simply stated as true without any deeper explanation or reason behind them—like saying 'water is wet' and stopping there.
    reduced science(as used in philosophy of science and reduction)
    A scientific field or theory that is being explained by breaking it down into simpler parts or more fundamental principles.
    reducing science(as used in philosophy of science and reduction)
    The simpler or more fundamental scientific field or theory that is used to explain another, more complex one.

    Related

    Explanations are not all-or-nothing; there are degrees of explanatory depth.There need not be a conceptual path from concepts or predicates of the reducing ...

    Similar

    There need not be a conceptual path from concepts or predicates of the...79%Partial reductions share important features with mechanistic explanati...78%Reduction requires more than mere derivation; it requires an explanato...78%Explanations that depend heavily on causal propensities explain less t...76%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: scientific-reduction
    View source passageHide passage
    Thus, even if two theories instantiate a relation of the sort required by Nagel’s model, we should not speak of proper reduction, if as a matter of epistemic possibility the connection between the domains of the two theories remains too loose to support the materialist claims. Levine (1993) gives this an epistemological interpretation; Chalmers (1996) seems to suggest that the epistemic possibility of two concepts coming apart implies that there is a metaphysical possibility of the two propertie

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective