Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Descartes explicitly grounds modal claims in divine omnipotence, not just clear and distinct perception (Replies to Objections VI).
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Descartes consistently treats clear and distinct perception as the primary criterion for truth and necessity throughout his work.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
The appeal to omnipotence in Replies VI may address logical possibility, not metaphysical grounding of modal knowledge itself.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Descartes' actual practice relies on rational intuition of essences, not explicit invocation of divine power for modal judgments.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Descartes explicitly invokes God's omnipotence to explain modal distinctions (possible vs. impossible) in Replies VI.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Clear and distinct perception alone cannot ground modality without circularity—only divine power can serve as ultimate foundation.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Descartes needs omnipotence to explain why some things are genuinely impossible, not merely unclear to finite minds.
?
How convincing is this?
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.