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 Therefore disjunctivism mimics the logical form of determination without capturing its essential metaphysical character.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Disjunctivism's distinction between success and failure cases captures essential metaphysical difference that determination theory also requires.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Logical form and metaphysical character are not separable: how states relate logically constitutes part of their genuine metaphysical structure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The claim assumes determination has a univocal 'essential character' beyond logical structure—a substantive metaphysical claim needing independent argument.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Disjunctivism treats perception as either veridical or hallucinatory, mirroring determination's binary structure without explaining causal dependency.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Determination requires one state necessitating another; disjunctivism merely posits alternative states without grounding their necessity relation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The logical form (A or B) can be satisfied without metaphysical grounding in powers, substances, or causal production that determination demands.
      ?

      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.