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
    Admitting any brute fact — including God's existence — di... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Whatever exists must have a cause or ground for its existence

    Admitting any brute fact — including God's existence — dissolves the original argumentative force of demanding causes for all things.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The cosmological argument's force depends on treating 'why does anything exist?' as requiring explanation. Accepting brute facts undermines this universality.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If God can exist without explanation, the original demand for causes loses its rational justification—we've simply relocated the brute fact, not resolved it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Logical consistency requires either all facts need causes or some don't. Positing God as exception-to-the-rule is an ad hoc move that abandons the argument's premise.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Some brute facts may be necessary truths or self-explanatory (like logical laws), not arbitrary exceptions. These don't undermine causal reasoning generally.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The argument only requires contingent facts to have causes—not that absolutely everything must. God's necessity (if true) differs categorically from contingent existence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Distinguishing between brute facts that demand explanation and those that don't is coherent if principled. The challenge lies in criteria, not the existence of brute facts itself.
      ?

      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.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Causation1 linkedNatural Theology1 linked

    Related

    Distinguishing between brute facts that demand explanation and those that don't ...If God can exist without explanation, the original demand for causes loses its r...Logical consistency requires either all facts need causes or some don't. Positin...Some brute facts may be necessary truths or self-explanatory (like logical laws)...
    +3 moreShow less
    The argument only requires contingent facts to have causes—not that absolutely e...The cosmological argument's force depends on treating 'why does anything exist?'...Whatever exists must have a cause or ground for its existence

    Details

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