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
    Defenders of the gift analogy must argue that life given ... — Carmelics
    Home/Afterlife & Death
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Defenders of the gift analogy must argue that life given by a loving God is necessarily a benefit to the recipient, to sustain the analogy as a prohibition against suicide.

    Afterlife & Death
    ?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.The gift analogy only prohibits suicide if life is genuinely a benefit.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Life given by a loving and benevolent God would, by virtue of God's nature, be a benefit.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore defenders must commit to the claim that God's benevolence guarantees life is a benefit.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Aquinas himself grounded the prohibition not in life-as-benefit but in God's exclusive dominion over life and death as sovereign.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the gift analogy's force derives from divine lordship rather than beneficence, the prohibition holds even when life is a burden to the recipient.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore defenders need not commit to life being a benefit; the analogy functions as a property-rights claim, not a welfare claim.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Hume argued in 'Of Suicide' that a loving God who permits natural death by disease permits the same causal interference with life via human action.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If God's benevolence is compatible with permitting extreme suffering before natural death, it cannot by itself guarantee life remains a net benefit at every moment.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore the inference from divine benevolence to life-as-perpetual-benefit contains a gap that defenders of the gift analogy have not closed.
      ?

      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

    Afterlife & Death

    Related

    Aquinas himself grounded the prohibition not in life-as-benefit but in God's exc...Hume argued in 'Of Suicide' that a loving God who permits natural death by disea...If God's benevolence is compatible with permitting extreme suffering before natu...If the gift analogy's force derives from divine lordship rather than beneficence...
    +5 moreShow less
    Life given by a loving and benevolent God would, by virtue of God's nature, be a...The gift analogy only prohibits suicide if life is genuinely a benefit.Therefore defenders must commit to the claim that God's benevolence guarantees l...Therefore defenders need not commit to life being a benefit; the analogy functio...Therefore the inference from divine benevolence to life-as-perpetual-benefit con...

    Similar

    The gift analogy only prohibits suicide if life is genuinely a benefit...94%The gift analogy fails to justify the claim that God's giving of life ...92%The debt-of-gratitude variation of the gift analogy also fails to proh...88%The gift analogy implies life cannot be rejected or disposed of withou...87%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: suicide
    View source passageHide passage
    Another common analogy asserts that God bestows life upon us as a gift, and it would be a mark of ingratitude or neglect to reject that gift by taking our lives. The obvious weakness with this “gift analogy” is that a gift, genuinely given, does not come with conditions such as that suggested by the analogy, i.e., once given, a gift becomes the property of its recipient and its giver no longer has any claim on what the recipient does with this gift. It may perhaps be imprudent to waste an especi
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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