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 Wilfrid Sellars argued that predication cannot be analyzed as a relation between a thing and a property because properties, as abstract entities, lack the causal-nomological role required for genuine predication.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Mathematical and logical truths require abstract entities; rejecting them undermines our understanding of formal sciences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Causal powers needn't exhaust predication's function; properties can ground truth-conditions without causal efficacy.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The demand that properties be causally active conflates metaphysics with physics, wrongly prioritizing empirical causation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Only causally efficacious entities can ground meaningful predications; abstract properties lack causal powers.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Predication must explain why things behave as they do; property-relations alone cannot account for this explanatory role.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Our best scientific ontology privileges concrete, causally-active particulars over causally-inert abstract entities.
      ?

      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.