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
    We have sufficient reason to accept unactualized possibil... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Natural Theology
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    We have sufficient reason to accept unactualized possibilities as real entities

    Modality & Possibility
    ?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.The best versions of many philosophical theories require quantification over possibilities
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Theoretical entities that make our philosophical theories significantly better give us sufficient reason to accept them
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Modal discourse can be fully systematized via ersatzism: abstract representations of possibilities constructed from actual-world materials suffice for all theoretical work.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.An ontology of linguistic or structural ersatz worlds achieves the same theoretical benefits as Lewisian realism without positing causally isolated concrete universes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Ontological parsimony requires preferring the theory that matches explanatory power while minimizing categories of fundamental entities, favoring ersatzism over modal realism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The theoretical utility of quantifying over Xs does not establish that Xs exist as mind-independent entities, as Carnap's distinction between internal and external questions demonstrates.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Lewis's inference from indispensability in philosophical theorizing to ontological commitment illicitly borrows from scientific indispensability arguments, which themselves remain deeply contested.
      ?

      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

    Natural TheologyModality & Possibility

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedPhilosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    An ontology of linguistic or structural ersatz worlds achieves the same theoreti...Lewis's inference from indispensability in philosophical theorizing to ontologic...Modal discourse can be fully systematized via ersatzism: abstract representation...Ontological parsimony requires preferring the theory that matches explanatory po...
    +3 moreShow less
    The best versions of many philosophical theories require quantification over pos...The theoretical utility of quantifying over Xs does not establish that Xs exist ...Theoretical entities that make our philosophical theories significantly better g...

    Similar

    Non-actual possible worlds necessarily exist (assumed for the sake of ...77%Therefore the non-actual possible worlds in which possibilia exist are...77%Imagination is not a safe indication of real possibility, even when su...77%If Kripke is correct, such imagined scenarios are not real possibiliti...76%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: david-lewis
    View source passageHide passage
    In the first chapter of Plurality Lewis takes a much more orthodox Quinean line. He argues, at great length, that the best version of many philosophical theories requires quantification over possibilities. In traditional terms, he offers an extended indispensability argument for unactualised possibilities. But traditional terms are perhaps misleading here. Lewis does not say that possibilities are absolutely indispensable, only that they make our philosophical theories so much better that we h
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit