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 Strong global supervenience's universal quantification over isomorphisms entails intermediate's existential claim only if at least one isomorphism exists, yet worlds with radically different cardinalities may share B-profiles with no isomorphism available.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Strong supervenience is typically defined without explicit isomorphism requirements, making the claim's formalization non-standard and potentially question-begging.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.B-profile identity across different cardinalities may indicate weak supervenience suffices, not that strong supervenience fails for cardinality-divergent worlds.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The existential claim about intermediate states doesn't logically depend on isomorphisms existing if supervenience operates at the level of properties alone.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Universal quantification over isomorphisms requires at least one isomorphism to ground any existential claims about supervenience relations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Worlds differing in cardinality can exhibit identical B-profiles, demonstrating that shared intrinsic properties don't guarantee structural correspondence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If isomorphism-dependence is built into strong supervenience, then absence of isomorphisms creates a logical gap between global and intermediate claims.
      ?

      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.