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 Attributes, not modes, must be the individuating principle for substances.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Modes can individuate substances if they constitute a unique, non-transferable bundle that no other substance could possess, as bundle theorists like Hume suggest.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If substance identity is grounded in the totality of its modes rather than any single mode, the dependence relation does not preclude individuation by modes collectively.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Leibniz's principle of the identity of indiscernibles entails that two substances sharing all attributes would still be distinct if they differ in relational or positional modes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If attributes alone individuate substances, then two numerically distinct substances cannot share an attribute, yet Spinoza's own system allows finite modes of one attribute to be genuinely distinct, undermining attribute-based individuation as a general principle.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Any two substances must be distinguished either by their attributes or by their modes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Modes are ontologically and causally dependent on the substances of which they are affections.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Because modes depend on substances, modes cannot serve as the individuating principle for substances.
      ?

      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.