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 Any thing other than God that is called 'one' can be one only through participation in a unity extrinsic to it

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Aristotle's hylomorphic theory holds that composite substances are unified per se through form, not by participating in an external unity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If substantial form confers unity intrinsically upon a composite, then creatures need not receive unity from something extrinsic to their own natures.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Avicenna's distinction between necessary and contingent existence already accounts for creaturely dependence without requiring that their unity specifically be extrinsic.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Spinoza's substance monism entails that finite modes possess intrinsic unity as determinate expressions of the one infinite substance.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If creaturely unity is simply a modal expression of divine unity rather than an extrinsic participation in it, the claim conflates ontological dependence with extrinsic derivation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Any thing other than God that is called 'one' is one only accidentally, not essentially
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Whatever is one only accidentally must derive its unity from something external to it
      ?

      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.