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 A theism that understands itself must uphold God's ontological simplicity.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Divine aseity requires only that God depends on nothing external for existence, not that God lacks internal distinctions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A God with distinct real properties (omniscience, omnipotence, goodness) can still be wholly self-existent and uncaused.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, aseity underdetermines simplicity, and the entailment in P1 does not hold.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Theistic personalism (Swinburne, Plantinga) holds that God is a maximally great person with distinct real attributes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A self-understanding theism can coherently prioritize God's personal agency and intentional action over Neoplatonic metaphysical commitments.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The claim that theism 'must' uphold simplicity privileges one theological tradition (classical theism) over other internally coherent theistic frameworks.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • God's ontological simplicity is implied by the divine aseity.
      ?

      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.