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 There must be a thing (a truthmaker) that makes each truth true.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Frege and Ramsey demonstrated that 'it is true that p' is logically redundant, adding no content beyond the assertion of p itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If truth ascriptions are redundant rather than relational, there is no explanatory gap that a truthmaker entity needs to fill.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A deflationary account of truth is thus parsimony-preserving in a way that truthmaker theory, which multiplies ontological commitments beyond necessity, is not.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Negative truths (e.g., 'there are no unicorns') have no plausible candidate entity to serve as their truthmaker.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Any posited truthmaker for negative truths—such as totality facts or absences—is ontologically more problematic than the original commitment to correspondence warrants.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Truth obtains in virtue of word-to-world relations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The ontological aspect of the neo-classical correspondence theory requires not merely word-to-world relations but an entity grounding each truth.
      ?

      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.