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
    Two levels of discourse A and B are more-than-causally co... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Modality & Possibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Two levels of discourse A and B are more-than-causally connected only if one entails the other a priori

    Causation
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.In relatively uncontroversial cases of a posteriori necessary connections, one can argue a priori from facts about the microstructure to the manifest facts
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.In the case of water, it follows a priori that if something has the micro-level properties attributed to H2O by chemistry, then that thing would possess waterish macro-level properties
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.What is established a posteriori is merely that H2O is the substance that underlies and explains waterish properties, not that the sufficiency of the base requires a posteriori reasoning
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Chalmers' conceivability argument shows that zombies are ideally conceivable, meaning no a priori inference from physical to phenomenal facts succeeds even in principle.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If phenomenal consciousness is more-than-causally connected to physical states (as property dualists and many physicalists hold), yet no a priori entailment holds, the biconditional fails.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The supporting argument illicitly conflates functional-dispositional properties like waterish behavior with intrinsic qualitative properties like phenomenal character, which resist a priori derivation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kripke's necessary a posteriori shows that identity statements like 'water=H2O' are necessary yet knowable only empirically, establishing a category of non-entailing necessary connections.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If necessary connections can hold without a priori entailment, then more-than-causal connection does not require a priori entailment as a necessary condition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Modality & PossibilityCausation

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedPhilosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    Chalmers' conceivability argument shows that zombies are ideally conceivable, me...If necessary connections can hold without a priori entailment, then more-than-ca...If phenomenal consciousness is more-than-causally connected to physical states (...In relatively uncontroversial cases of a posteriori necessary connections, one c...
    +4 moreShow less
    In the case of water, it follows a priori that if something has the micro-level ...Kripke's necessary a posteriori shows that identity statements like 'water=H2O' ...The supporting argument illicitly conflates functional-dispositional properties ...

    Similar

    Indicator words can signal a causal connection rather than an argument77%By A111, Kant is discussing the use of the relational categories, and ...77%Guidelines G5 and G6 assert that causal and structural analogies are s...76%Accessibility is a relation between DRSs and derivatively between disc...75%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: dualism
    View source passageHide passage
    The only general argument that seem to be available for this would be the principle that, for any two levels of discourse, A and B, they are more-than-causally connected only if one entails the other a priori. And the argument for accepting this principle would be that the relatively uncontroversial cases of a posteriori necessary connections are in fact cases in which one can argue a priori from facts about the microstructure to the manifest facts. In the case of water, for example, it would be
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    What is established a posteriori is merely that H2O is the substance that underl...
    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit