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 singular term argument for propositions is more powerful than the singular term argument for mathematical objects

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Paraphrases of belief ascriptions using sentential operators (e.g., Quine's 'believes-true') eliminate the need for propositional singular terms.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If sententialist strategies (Davidson, Quine) successfully reparse 'S believes that p' without quantifying over propositions, the paraphrase asymmetry collapses.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The existence of serious, contested paraphrase programs for propositional attitudes undermines the claim that no strategies exist for eliminating proposition-names.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Mathematical singular terms occur in canonical scientific theories whose indispensability is argued by Quine-Putnam, giving them stronger ontological pressure than propositional terms.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Propositional singular terms are primarily artifacts of mentalistic folk psychology, which eliminativists like Churchland argue is a defective framework slated for revision.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If the theoretical framework generating propositional singular terms is itself eliminable, those terms carry less ontological weight than mathematical terms embedded in confirmed physics.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.There are established programs for paraphrasing statements of mathematics (paraphrase nominalism)
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.There are no obvious strategies for paraphrasing ordinary belief ascriptions of the form 'S believes that p'
      ?

      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.