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
    Damian can affirm the possibility of restoring virginity ... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Divine Attributes
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Damian can affirm the possibility of restoring virginity without affirming the possibility of undoing the done

    Divine AttributesModality & Possibility
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.There exist kinds of restoration of virginity that do not require removing or altering past events
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Affirming the possibility of undoing the done would require affirming that past events can be removed or altered
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Virginity is constitutively defined by the unbroken history of a person's body, not merely by present physical or moral state.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Any restoration of virginity that leaves the past intact thereby restores something categorically different from original virginity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If what is restored differs categorically from what was lost, affirming its restoration does not affirm the possibility of restoring virginity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Aristotle's principle that the past is necessary (what has happened cannot not have happened) applies to relational properties like virginity that are partly constituted by temporal sequence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A distinction between 'restoring virginity' and 'undoing the done' cannot be coherently maintained when the property in question is internally indexed to its own causal history.
      ?

      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.

    Topics

    Divine AttributesModality & Possibility

    Connections

    1 topic

    Causation1 linked

    Related

    A distinction between 'restoring virginity' and 'undoing the done' cannot be coh...Affirming the possibility of undoing the done would require affirming that past ...Any restoration of virginity that leaves the past intact thereby restores someth...Aristotle's principle that the past is necessary (what has happened cannot not h...
    +3 moreShow less
    If what is restored differs categorically from what was lost, affirming its rest...There exist kinds of restoration of virginity that do not require removing or al...Virginity is constitutively defined by the unbroken history of a person's body, ...

    Similar

    Damian maintains that God can restore virginity to a woman who has los...87%Damian's concept of restoring virginity does not require interfering w...85%There exist kinds of restoration of virginity that do not require remo...84%If Damian does not share the assumption that restoration of virginity ...82%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: peter-damian
    View source passageHide passage
    There is a curious feature in Damian’s idea about restoring virginity. Damian talks about kinds of restoration of virginity that do not require any interfering with past events (see Section 4). This is significant because it ruins our constructed argument for the claim that Damian has to deny the universal validity of the principle of non-contradiction (above, steps [1]–[5]). If Damian does not share the assumption that restoration of virginity consists in removing some events in the past (ste
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit