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 rigidified property 'actually being on David's right' is parasitic on a contingent spatial relation that could have failed to obtain.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Rigidified properties fix their reference through actual facts, but this doesn't make them parasitic—only historically grounded.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
A property can be non-parasitic even if its instantiation depends on contingent relations; parasitism requires conceptual dependence.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Being-on-David's-right is a complete relational property, not derived from or secondary to simpler properties.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Rigidified properties designate objects by their actual spatiotemporal location, making them dependent on contingent facts.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
A property is parasitic if its identity requires reference to another property that could have been different.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
David could have been positioned differently, so any property defined relative to his actual position is contingent.
?
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.