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 All ontological differences are categorial articulations of being, not differences between being and non-being.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Meinong's theory of objects establishes that non-existent objects (golden mountains, round squares) have genuine Sosein (character) without Sein (being).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If non-existent objects possess determinate properties, then the difference between being and non-being is itself ontologically significant, not merely a categorial distinction within being.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Hartmann's collapse of all differences into categorial articulations of being therefore illicitly excludes a domain his own realist commitments cannot explain away.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Aquinas's real distinction between esse (act of existing) and essentia entails that essence is genuinely conceivable apart from existence, making non-being a coherent contrast class to being.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If essences can be understood as indifferent to existence — as Avicenna and Scotus also argued — then the difference between instantiated and uninstantiated natures is not a difference within being but a difference between being and its absence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Hartmann's claim that all ontological differences are categorial therefore presupposes the very univocity of being that the Scholastic esse-essentia tradition was specifically designed to reject.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Parts and wholes are both authentic aspects of being.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Independent and dependent entities are similarly aspects of being.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Physical, biological, psychological and spiritual types of being are all manifestations of being.
      ?

      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.