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 inference from W1's containing p to W1 being identica... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→There is something (some proposition q) that explains the Big Conjunctive Contingent Fact (BCCF) of the actual world.

    The inference from W1's containing p to W1 being identical to the actual world illicitly assumes that shared contingent facts exhaust world-individuation.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Worlds can differ in non-contingent ways (e.g., logical structure, metaphysical laws) beyond what facts they contain.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Identity requires not just shared properties but also identity of origin and fundamental constitution, not mere content overlap.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Two worlds sharing all contingent facts could still differ in which contingencies are possible, indicating distinct identities.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.If two worlds share all actual contingent facts, denying their identity requires explaining what non-trivial distinction remains.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.World-individuation by content is standard in modal semantics; rejecting it needs principled alternative criteria beyond assertion.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The inference is valid if 'actual world' is defined as the world-candidate containing all true contingent propositions.
      ?

      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.

    Connections

    1 topic

    Natural Theology1 linked

    Related

    Identity requires not just shared properties but also identity of origin and fun...If two worlds share all actual contingent facts, denying their identity requires...The inference is valid if 'actual world' is defined as the world-candidate conta...There is something (some proposition q) that explains the Big Conjunctive Contin...
    +3 moreShow less
    Two worlds sharing all contingent facts could still differ in which contingencie...World-individuation by content is standard in modal semantics; rejecting it need...Worlds can differ in non-contingent ways (e.g., logical structure, metaphysical ...

    Details

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