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 Supervenience physicalism avoids the problem that token physicalism faces with social or legal objects.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Supervenience is compatible with dualism, as Chalmers demonstrated: consciousness supervenes on physics without being physical.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If supervenience alone does not entail physicalism for consciousness, it equally fails to secure physicalism for social or legal objects.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A claim that avoids one problem by adopting a relation too weak to guarantee physicalism has not solved but merely deferred the explanatory burden.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Jaegwon Kim showed that global supervenience is too coarse-grained to capture the dependence relations physicalism requires.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Two possible worlds could be micro-physically identical yet differ in which legal facts obtain if legal facts depend on intentional attitudes not fully fixed by local physical states.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Supervenience physicalism therefore does not trivially dissolve the problem of social objects but inherits Kim's challenge about what grounds the supervenience relation itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Supervenience physicalism entails that the facts about the court supervene on physical facts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Supervenience physicalism does not entail that there is any physical object that the court is identical with.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Token physicalism requires identity between the court and some physical object, which is unintuitive for social or legal objects.
      ?

      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.