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
    A life is an event but not the history of something. — Carmelics
    Home/Afterlife & Death
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    A life is an event but not the history of something.

    Afterlife & Death
    ?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.A life is a purely biological event that takes place entirely inside a person's skin.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Russell's life included the oxygenation of his hemoglobin molecules but not the publication of his books.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.A life is constituted by relational and narrative structures that extend beyond the biological boundary of a person's skin.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Dilthey and MacIntyre argue that a life gains its intelligibility only through the historical connections binding actions, intentions, and consequences across time.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If narrative and historical coherence are necessary for a life to be the kind of thing that can be evaluated, then a life is precisely the history of something.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The supporting argument conflates the biological substrate of life with the ontological category of a life as a whole.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Hemoglobin oxygenation and book publication are both causally indispensable to Russell's life understood as a unified biographical entity, so excluding the latter is arbitrary.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Aristotle's account of eudaimonia requires that a life be assessed only at its completion, presupposing that a life is an extended historical narrative, not a bounded biological event.
      ?

      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

    Afterlife & Death

    Related

    A life is a purely biological event that takes place entirely inside a person's ...A life is constituted by relational and narrative structures that extend beyond ...Aristotle's account of eudaimonia requires that a life be assessed only at its c...Dilthey and MacIntyre argue that a life gains its intelligibility only through t...
    +4 moreShow less
    Hemoglobin oxygenation and book publication are both causally indispensable to R...If narrative and historical coherence are necessary for a life to be the kind of...Russell's life included the oxygenation of his hemoglobin molecules but not the ...The supporting argument conflates the biological substrate of life with the onto...

    Similar

    Later events may affect the meaning of earlier events, and the latter ...77%A timeless being's life events don't involve succession.77%A life is a purely biological event that takes place entirely inside a...75%After death no events can alter a moment of a person's life.73%

    Source

    AI-extracted3/3 agreementValid
    SEP: death
    View source passageHide passage
    According to a second theorist, Peter van Inwagen, while a life is indeed an event, it is not the history of something. “‘Russell’s life,’” van Inwagen writes (1990, p. 83), “denotes a purely biological event, an event which took place entirely inside Russell’s skin and which went on for ninety-seven years.” Russell’s life included the oxygenation of his hemoglobin molecules but not the publication of his books.
    Extraction notes

    Validity: The premises accurately reflect van Inwagen's reasoning as presented in the passage: by defining a life as a purely biological event occurring inside one's skin (premise 1) and illustrating this by including biological processes but excluding external achievements (premise 2), the conclusion that a life is an event but not a history naturally follows.

    Confidence: The argument is clearly presented: van Inwagen defines a life as a purely biological event internal to the organism, supported by the example distinguishing internal biological processes from external accomplishments.

    Details

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