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

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 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

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.