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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that A redefinition of the standard kinds of predication was required.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Aristotle's Categories already provides a stable taxonomy of predication—essential, accidental, per se, per accidens—sufficient to handle identity and difference in subject-predicate relations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Scotus's formal distinction, on which the real identity/formal non-identity framework depends, was rejected by Aquinas as introducing an illicit intermediate between real and conceptual distinctions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If the formal distinction fails as a coherent ontological category, the asymmetries in predication it was invoked to explain dissolve, removing the motivation for any redefinition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Ockham's nominalism demonstrates that a parsimonious ontology of individuals with no real universals renders formal distinctions between predication types explanatorily otiose.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If all genuine predication reduces to singular terms referring to particulars, no redefinition of predication kinds is required—only elimination of spurious metaphysical categories.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The relationship between universals and individuals is described in terms of real identity and formal distinction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.This description entails that not all that is predicated of individuals can be directly (formaliter) attributed to their universals and vice versa.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.This description also entails that all that is predicated of individuals has to be in some way or another attributed to universals and vice versa.
      ?

      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.
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42