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 The existence of general predicates like 'is red' does not entail that objects share a single determinable property called redness

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.General terms do not necessarily denote abstract ideas that correspond to real features of reality
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.It is an uncritical tendency to 'read off' features of reality from ways of speaking about it
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Even if the predicate 'is red' truly applies to multiple objects, this does not require those objects to possess the very same property
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Resemblance nominalism, defended by Rodriguez-Pereiro, grounds predicate application in pairwise resemblance relations among particulars, not shared universals.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Two red objects may resemble each other more closely than either resembles a blue object without both instantiating a single property called redness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If resemblance relations do the explanatory work attributed to determinable properties, positing redness as a real shared property violates Ockham's Razor.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Wittgenstein's 'family resemblance' account shows that items falling under a common predicate need share no single common property, only overlapping similarities.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If family resemblance suffices for predicate application, then 'is red' can unify objects through networks of resemblance without requiring a shared determinable redness.
      ?

      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.