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's Third Way demonstrates that a deductive argumen... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Swinburne's cosmological argument should be constructed inductively rather than deductively

    Aquinas's Third Way demonstrates that a deductive argument from contingency to necessary being avoids the regress problem without invoking probabilistic reasoning.

    ?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.Contingent beings require explanation; an infinite regress of contingent causes provides no ultimate explanation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A necessary being (one that cannot fail to exist) logically terminates regress without invoking probability or brute fact.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Deductive form avoids probabilistic reasoning by establishing that contingency entails necessity as a logical requirement.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The move from 'contingent things require explanation' to 'the totality requires explanation' commits a composition fallacy.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Necessity is a property of propositions (analytic truths), not ontological beings; Aquinas conflates logical with metaphysical necessity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The argument assumes 'necessary being' is intelligible without demonstrating why God (if that's the conclusion) must be necessary.
      ?

      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 topic

    Natural Theology1 linked

    Related

    A necessary being (one that cannot fail to exist) logically terminates regress w...Contingent beings require explanation; an infinite regress of contingent causes ...Deductive form avoids probabilistic reasoning by establishing that contingency e...Necessity is a property of propositions (analytic truths), not ontological being...
    +3 moreShow less
    Swinburne's cosmological argument should be constructed inductively rather than ...The argument assumes 'necessary being' is intelligible without demonstrating why...The move from 'contingent things require explanation' to 'the totality requires ...

    Details

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