Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Aquinas himself distinguishes God's intellect, will, and power as conceptually distinct attributes with different formal objects.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
If God is truly simple, any 'conceptual distinction' risks being merely linguistic convention rather than reflecting genuine metaphysical reality in God.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Aquinas's own commitment to divine simplicity logically entails that intellect, will, and power are identical in God, making 'distinct attributes' incoherent.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
The distinction may smuggle in implicit compositional structure that undermines rather than preserves the doctrine of divine simplicity.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Aquinas's Summa explicitly treats intellect, will, and power separately with distinct formal objects, demonstrating his systematic philosophical method.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Conceptual distinction preserves divine simplicity while allowing theological language about God's different perfections to remain meaningful and non-redundant.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Medieval philosophy required distinguishing real operations (knowing, willing, acting) that appear distinct in creation to avoid anthropomorphic confusion about God.
?
How convincing is this?
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.