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
    Structural equation models cannot adequately represent gr... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Modality & Possibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Structural equation models cannot adequately represent grounding and metaphysical explanation

    Causation
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    0 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Determining whether a causal model includes the right variables to represent a causal structure typically requires reference to theories supported by a posteriori evidence
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.In the case of grounding, a posteriori evidence for model-aptness is not available
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The grounding theorist must countenance counterpossibles, not merely all possible scenarios, which is a further demand not present in ordinary causal modeling
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

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

    Topics

    Modality & PossibilityCausation

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    1 topic

    Truth & Knowledge2 linked

    Related

    Determining whether a causal model includes the right variables to represent a c...In the case of grounding, a posteriori evidence for model-aptness is not availab...The grounding theorist must countenance counterpossibles, not merely all possibl...

    Similar

    Unionists about grounding and grounding explanation owe an account of ...81%A structural equation model account of grounding must include counterp...81%The analogy between grounding explanation and causal explanation assum...81%Separatists about grounding explanation owe an account of how the link...80%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: metaphysical-explanation
    View source passageHide passage
    Against the account, a couple of things can and have been said. First, just as there are important analogies between grounding and causation (of the ordinary, run-of-the mill sort: §1), there are disanalogies as well. This is accepted by both friends and foes of the view. The question then is whether those differences are serious enough to undermine the work the analogy does in the account (proponents of the account, not surprisingly don’t think so; for some who do: see, e.g., Bernstein 2016,
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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