Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that The additional constraints in Schaffner's model and New Wave models are not necessary conditions for reduction
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
2 perspectives
Reason for 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.
?
How convincing is this?
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.
?
How convincing is this?
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.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reason for 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.
?
How convincing is this?
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.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
The further constraints imposed in Schaffner's model and New Wave models are always disjunctive
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Disjunctive constraints function as accompanying characterizations of the definition rather than as necessary conditions
?
How convincing is this?
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.