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 We must either deny that the many Dalmatian-parts are Dalmatians, or deny that the Dalmatians are many

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Constitution theorists (Wiggins, Johnston) distinguish the Dalmatian as a sortal-relative continuant from the dog-parts that merely constitute it at a time.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Because 'Dalmatian' is a phase-sortal tied to a biological life, only the organism whose career the sortal tracks counts as the Dalmatian, not its mereological parts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The problem of the many thus dissolves: there is one Dalmatian and many non-identical constituting aggregates, rejecting the premise that parts have equal sortal claim.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Lewis's dominant-kinds solution holds that among the many candidates, only the one best satisfying the dominant sortal 'Dalmatian' determinately instantiates the kind.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Shedding fur creates margin cases for the aggregates but not for Oscar, since biological organism-kinds are graded by overall functional and genetic integration, not boundary sharpness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The dilemma's forced choice collapses once we accept that vague boundaries generate vague many-membership, not numerically many equal Dalmatians.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Oscar sheds continuously but gradually, so within Oscar's compass at any time there are many Dalmatian-parts that will become definitely Dalmatians at varying future times
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.It is arbitrary to count a part a split second away from being definitely a Dalmatian as a Dalmatian while denying that status to one a day away
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.By Unger's problem of the many, all such parts have equal claim to Dalmatian-hood
      ?

      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.