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
    The additional constraints in Schaffner's model and New W... — Carmelics
    Home/Consciousness & Mind
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The additional constraints in Schaffner's model and New Wave models are not necessary conditions for reduction

    Consciousness & Mind
    ?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.The further constraints imposed in Schaffner's model and New Wave models are always disjunctive
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Disjunctive constraints function as accompanying characterizations of the definition rather than as necessary conditions
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Schaffner's corrected reduction model requires that the reducing theory explain why the reduced theory worked approximately, which is a genuine necessary condition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A disjunctive constraint can still function as a necessary condition if each disjunct tracks a distinct but equally required explanatory relationship.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Nagel-style bridge laws already failed precisely because they lacked the corrective constraints Schaffner added, confirming those constraints do real reductive work.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Churchland and Bickle's New Wave reduction treats degree of isomorphism between models as a scalar necessary condition, not a disjunctive accompaniment.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If near-enough structural preservation were merely optional, smooth intertheoretic reduction could not be distinguished from mere replacement or elimination.
      ?

      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

    Consciousness & Mind

    Connections

    1 topic

    Philosophy of Language2 linked

    Related

    A disjunctive constraint can still function as a necessary condition if each dis...Churchland and Bickle's New Wave reduction treats degree of isomorphism between ...Disjunctive constraints function as accompanying characterizations of the defini...If near-enough structural preservation were merely optional, smooth intertheoret...
    +3 moreShow less
    Nagel-style bridge laws already failed precisely because they lacked the correct...Schaffner's corrected reduction model requires that the reducing theory explain ...The further constraints imposed in Schaffner's model and New Wave models are alw...

    Similar

    The further constraints imposed in Schaffner's model and New Wave mode...82%Broad's model does not clearly meet the requirements of the Strong Con...75%UG supplies a theory of those constraints71%Disjunctive constraints function as accompanying characterizations of ...71%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: scientific-reduction
    View source passageHide passage
    The quantification is restricted to bridge-laws of the appropriate kind. A variant of this definition interprets the relata as sets of laws of two theories. Nagel’s homogeneous reductions are trivially covered (bridge-laws are irrelevant for the derivation; however, they do exist and state trivial connections not connecting distinct predicates, but the very same predicate in the reduced and the reducing theory). Variants of this definition include Schaffner’s model that, in addition, mentions po
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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