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
    An aggregate of possible things is itself possible in itself — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Natural Theology
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→The aggregate of possible things cannot be self-caused

    An aggregate of possible things is itself possible in itself

    Modality & PossibilityNatural Theology
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Natural TheologyModality & Possibility

    Connections

    1 linked claim · 1 topic

    Causation2 linked
    The aggregate of possible things cannot be self-caused

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Natural Theology
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.

    Related

    Possible things in themselves have no existence in their essence — both existenc...The aggregate of possible things cannot be self-causedThe nature of what is possible in itself does not change independently of a caus...What is possible in itself cannot cause its own existence

    Similar

    An aggregate of possible things cannot be self-caused84%The aggregate of possible things cannot be self-caused84%The aggregate of all contingent things cannot exist without a cause.80%Ability ascriptions such as 'S is able to A' are possibility claims, t...80%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: albalag
    View source passageHide passage
    Avicenna divides “actual” beings, as opposed to impossible things, into necessary in itself and possible in itself but necessary through another (Davidson 1987: 292–3; McGinnis 2010: 159–164). The necessary in itself is that which has existence in its essence and an impossibility arises whenever it is assumed not to exist. By contrast, the possible in itself but necessary through another is that which “has no existence in essence” and “no impossibility” arises whether it is assumed to exist or n

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective