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
    Aquinas's argument from simplicity to infinity is fallacious — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Divine Attributes
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Aquinas's argument from simplicity to infinity is fallacious

    Against an attribute of GodDivine Attributes
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    0 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Aquinas's argument has the form: if P then Q; not P; therefore not Q
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.That argument form is the formal fallacy of denying the antecedent
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Divine AttributesAgainst an attribute of God

    Related

    Aquinas's argument has the form: if P then Q; not P; therefore not QThat argument form is the formal fallacy of denying the antecedent

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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

    Similar

    Simplicity does not entail infinity74%The Divine Nature is essentially infinite and incomprehensible.72%The argument against DDS (Divine Divine Simplicity) requires the assum...72%The One's simplicity precludes any form of being71%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: duns-scotus
    View source passageHide passage
    Scotus ascribes to Aquinas the following argument for the divine infinity: If a form is limited by matter, it is finite. God, being simple, is not limited by matter. Therefore, God is not finite. This, as Scotus points out, is a fallacious argument. (It’s an instance of denying the antecedent.) But even apart from the fallacy, simplicity is not going to get us infinity. As Scotus puts it: “if an entity is finite or infinite, it is so not by reason of something accidental to itself, but because i
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    1 (0 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit