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 Two distinct possible worlds can share all the same contingent facts while differing in which explanatory relations obtain between propositions.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.If worlds share all contingent facts, they share all facts about what explains what, since explanatory relations supervene on facts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Explanatory facts are themselves either necessary truths or contingent facts; there's no third category to differ in.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Allowing worlds to differ only in explanatory structure but not facts makes explanation metaphysically idle, not substantive.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Explanatory relations (grounding, causation) are distinct from the truth-values of propositions themselves.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Two scenarios can be physically/factually identical yet differ in which facts explain which—e.g., different causal orderings.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Explanatory structure is a genuine feature of reality not reducible to contingent fact distribution alone.
      ?

      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.