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 pot cannot be said to be a single entity. — Carmelics
    Home/Personal Identity
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    A pot cannot be said to be a single entity.

    Modality & PossibilityPersonal Identity
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    0 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.A pot has many characteristics, such as color, shape, hardness, and odor.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A thing with many distinct characteristics cannot be said to be single.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Personal IdentityModality & Possibility

    Connections

    1 topic

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.
    Divine Attributes
    1 linked

    Related

    A pot has many characteristics, such as color, shape, hardness, and odor.A thing with many distinct characteristics cannot be said to be single.

    Similar

    If none of the individual characteristics constitutes a pot, the pot c...88%A pot cannot be said to be a single whole composed of many characteris...87%A pot cannot be said to be many pots.82%Formal entities exist only in and through individual substances as the...77%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: madhyamaka
    View source passageHide passage
    An example of Āryadeva’s demonstrating an inconsistency in a particular position is his critique of the view that there is a permanent self. He observes that since a permanent self could not undergo change, it could not be harmed or destroyed, and therefore it is inconsistent for those who believe in such a self to promote ethical guidelines against killing or harming others. While Āryadeva endeavors in some chapters to show the inconsistencies in a number of particular doctrines of the Sāṃkhya
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    1 (0 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit