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
    The problem of change cannot determine which theory of pe... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Personal Identity
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The problem of change cannot determine which theory of persistence to adopt

    Modality & Possibility
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    2 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Both endurantism and perdurantism can accommodate intrinsic change via distinct strategies: indexing to times vs. temporal parts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Lewis's 'temporary intrinsics' problem dissolves symmetrically: adverbialism, relationalism, and stage theory each resolve it without privileging either persistence theory.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.When rival theories achieve logical parity in resolving the same problem, that problem loses its evidential force for adjudication between them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Haslanger and Sider both demonstrate that the problem of change can be formulated in ways presupposing either endurantism or perdurantism, making it dialectically question-begging.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A problem that generates circular reasoning when deployed as evidence cannot serve as a neutral arbiter between competing metaphysical frameworks.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • Considerations from the problem of change underdetermine the choice between competing persistence theories
      ?

      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

    Personal IdentityModality & Possibility

    Related

    A problem that generates circular reasoning when deployed as evidence cannot ser...Both endurantism and perdurantism can accommodate intrinsic change via distinct ...Considerations from the problem of change underdetermine the choice between comp...Haslanger and Sider both demonstrate that the problem of change can be formulate...
    +2 moreShow less
    Lewis's 'temporary intrinsics' problem dissolves symmetrically: adverbialism, re...When rival theories achieve logical parity in resolving the same problem, that p...

    Similar

    Considerations from the problem of change underdetermine the choice be...91%Each major theory of persistence fails when combined with presentism83%The problem of change does not provide decisive support for the perdur...83%Something must persist even through substantial change79%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: temporal-parts
    View source passageHide passage
    Suggested Reading: It’s a good idea to start with Lewis (1986a, pp. 203–4), who coins the phrase ‘problem of temporary intrinsics’, argues that none of the endurance theories of change are satisfactory, and sets out the perdurance account of change. Wasserman (2006) surveys the debate; see also Wasserman (2010). McTaggart (1927, sections 315–6), Simons (1987), Mellor (1998, section 8.4), McCall and Lowe (2009), and Oderberg (2004) argue that variation between temporal parts is not genuine change
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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