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 whole composed of man... — Carmelics
    Home/Personal Identity
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    A pot cannot be said to be a single whole composed of many characteristics.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.If a whole is ontologically dependent on its parts, then the whole has no existence independent of those parts and thus no unified identity of its own.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Nāgārjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā demonstrates that any relation between parts and wholes generates infinite regress, as the relation itself requires a further relating relation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A 'whole' that is nothing over and above its constituents is a conventional fiction, not a genuine singular entity capable of bearing identity across characteristic diversity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Vasubandhu's Abhidharma analysis shows that putative wholes reduce without remainder to momentary dharmas, leaving no substrate in which plural characteristics could inhere as one.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.For characteristics to constitute a single whole, they must share a common locus, but Dignāga's apoha theory entails that property-clusters are constructed through exclusion rather than discovered as unified natural kinds.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Some characteristics of a pot, such as shape and hardness, are material and therefore capable of contact and location.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Other characteristics of a pot, such as color and odor, are immaterial and have no location.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Characteristics of contrary natures cannot coherently form a single whole.
      ?

      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

    Personal IdentityModality & Possibility

    Related

    A 'whole' that is nothing over and above its constituents is a conventional fict...Characteristics of contrary natures cannot coherently form a single whole.For characteristics to constitute a single whole, they must share a common locus...If a whole is ontologically dependent on its parts, then the whole has no existe...
    +4 moreShow less
    Nāgārjuna's Mūlamadhyamakakārikā demonstrates that any relation between parts an...Other characteristics of a pot, such as color and odor, are immaterial and have ...Some characteristics of a pot, such as shape and hardness, are material and ther...Vasubandhu's Abhidharma analysis shows that putative wholes reduce without remai...

    Similar

    If none of the individual characteristics constitutes a pot, the pot c...91%A pot cannot be said to be a single entity.87%The characteristics of a pot (color, shape, hardness, odor) are indivi...86%A pot has many characteristics, such as color, shape, hardness, and od...82%

    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
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit