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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that The inference from W1's containing p to W1 being identical to the actual world illicitly assumes that shared contingent facts exhaust world-individuation.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 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

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42