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
    Strong global supervenience entails weak global superveni... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Modality & Possibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Strong global supervenience entails weak global supervenience.

    Modality & PossibilityTruth & Knowledge
    ?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.Strong global supervenience entails intermediate global supervenience.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Intermediate global supervenience entails weak global supervenience.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Entailment is transitive.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The modal operators governing 'strong' and 'weak' global supervenience quantify over different ranges of possible worlds, making transitivity through intermediate forms non-trivial.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Strong global supervenience uses cross-world necessity while weak global supervenience uses intra-world necessity, and Kim's own formulations reveal these are not straightforwardly nested.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Paull and Sider (1992) demonstrated that global supervenience formulations fail to correctly capture dependence relations when worlds differ in their domain of individuals.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the entailment chain through intermediate supervenience presupposes a fixed domain of individuals across worlds, it fails in variable-domain modal frameworks standard in philosophical logic.
      ?

      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

    Modality & PossibilityTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Consciousness & Mind2 linked

    Related

    Entailment is transitive.If the entailment chain through intermediate supervenience presupposes a fixed d...Intermediate global supervenience entails weak global supervenience.Paull and Sider (1992) demonstrated that global supervenience formulations fail ...
    +3 moreShow less
    Strong global supervenience entails intermediate global supervenience.Strong global supervenience uses cross-world necessity while weak global superve...The modal operators governing 'strong' and 'weak' global supervenience quantify ...

    Similar

    Intermediate global supervenience entails weak global supervenience.100%Strong individual supervenience entails intermediate and weak global s...91%Strong global supervenience entails intermediate global supervenience.91%A failure of weak supervenience that is compatible with global superve...90%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: supervenience
    View source passageHide passage
    It is easy to see that strong global supervenience entails intermediate global supervenience, which in turn entails weak global supervenience. If every B-preserving isomorphism between two worlds must itself be A-preserving, then if there are any B-preserving isomorphisms between two worlds at all, at least one of them must be A-preserving. So, strong global supervenience entails intermediate. And if at least one of any existing B-preserving isomorphisms between two worlds must itself be A-prese
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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