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
    Aquinas distinguishes esse (existence) from bene esse (fl... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→A person in Hell loses all existence

    Aquinas distinguishes esse (existence) from bene esse (flourishing), meaning privation of good does not entail privation of being itself.

    ?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.A thing can exist without possessing all perfections suited to its nature—e.g., a blind human exists but lacks sight.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Evil is best understood as privation (absence of due good) rather than positive force, requiring distinction between being and goodness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.This distinction preserves divine creation's goodness: God creates beings whose defective states are absences, not positive divine products.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The esse/bene esse distinction may be conceptually useful but risks incoherence: complete non-flourishing seems to undermine actual existence itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Privation requires a subject; calling it mere absence while maintaining being becomes semantically unclear about what 'being' itself means.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If a thing's essence includes its proper function, deprivation of that function arguably does entail deprivation of full being, not just goodness.
      ?

      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

    1 linked claim · 1 topic

    Annihilation1 linked
    A person in Hell loses all existence

    Related

    A person in Hell loses all existenceA thing can exist without possessing all perfections suited to its nature—e.g., ...Evil is best understood as privation (absence of due good) rather than positive ...If a thing's essence includes its proper function, deprivation of that function ...
    +3 moreShow less
    Privation requires a subject; calling it mere absence while maintaining being be...The esse/bene esse distinction may be conceptually useful but risks incoherence:...This distinction preserves divine creation's goodness: God creates beings whose ...

    Details

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