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 True propositions can be stated about non-existent objects.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Singular terms that fail to refer to existing objects fail to express genuine propositions, yielding only apparent statements (Russell, 'On Denoting').
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Apparent statements about 'the present King of France' are neither true nor false, because they lack a genuine subject of predication.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Without a genuine proposition, there is no truth-apt content, so 'true propositions about non-existents' is a category error.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Possessing a property requires instantiation in some domain, and non-existent objects instantiate nothing (Quine, 'On What There Is').
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Statements that appear to be about Pegasus or Holmes are best analyzed as predications on concepts or descriptions, not on objects themselves.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If the purported truth is really about a concept or description rather than an object, the claim that non-existent objects bear properties is dissolved rather than vindicated.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Non-existent objects are a genuine ontological category.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Non-existent objects can possess properties.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If an object possesses a property, true things can be said about that object.
      ?

      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.