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 W.E. Johnson's original determinable-determinate distinction was precisely motivated by such necessary incompatibilities, which identity-based mereology systematically fails to capture.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Identity-based mereology can represent exclusions via negation and property instantiation rules without requiring determinable-determinate distinctions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Johnson's distinction conflates metaphysical incompatibility with conceptual or linguistic relationships, conflating different orders of explanation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Modern type-token and parthood frameworks adequately capture necessary exclusions without positing a separate determinable ontology.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Johnson's determinables (e.g., color) necessarily exclude their determinates (e.g., red vs. blue) from coinstantiation in single objects.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Identity-based mereology treats parts as compositionally additive, unable to represent mutual exclusivity relations between properties.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Capturing necessary incompatibilities requires a framework recognizing determinable-determinate hierarchies as fundamental structural features.
      ?

      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.