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
    Divinity as a perfect being is entirely beyond having des... — Carmelics
    Home/Divine Attributes
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Divinity as a perfect being is entirely beyond having desires and aims.

    Against an attribute of God
    ?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.God lacks no perfection worthy of the name.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Desires and aims arise only when a perfection is lacking and sought.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore God has nothing to desire or aim at.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Aristotle's unmoved mover engages in self-directed intellection, showing perfect beings can have an intrinsic activity directed at an object.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.An activity directed at a proper object (e.g., self-contemplation) constitutes a functional analogue of aim without implying deficiency.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, having aims does not entail lacking a perfection, which undermines P2 of the supporting argument.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Aquinas holds that God wills the good freely and necessarily, meaning divine volition is compatible with absolute perfection (ST Ia, q.19).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If perfect willing is coherent, then desires and aims re-described as expressions of superabundant goodness need not presuppose any lack.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The supporting argument illicitly assumes a privative model of desire, ignoring expressive or emanative models present in Neoplatonic and Thomistic traditions.
      ?

      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 AttributesAgainst an attribute of God

    Connections

    1 topic

    Against an aspect of God1 linked

    Related

    An activity directed at a proper object (e.g., self-contemplation) constitutes a...Aquinas holds that God wills the good freely and necessarily, meaning divine vol...Aristotle's unmoved mover engages in self-directed intellection, showing perfect...Desires and aims arise only when a perfection is lacking and sought.
    +5 moreShow less
    God lacks no perfection worthy of the name.If perfect willing is coherent, then desires and aims re-described as expression...The supporting argument illicitly assumes a privative model of desire, ignoring ...Therefore God has nothing to desire or aim at.Therefore, having aims does not entail lacking a perfection, which undermines P2...

    Similar

    God is an infinite and perfect being.85%God is the most perfect being, possessing all perfections85%Desires and aims arise only when a perfection is lacking and sought.84%God, as a perfect being, cannot be subject to privation or lack.84%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: halevi
    View source passageHide passage
    The philosopher opens his presentation with a sharply negative appraisal of the presuppositions underlying the king's dream and offers a brief critical analysis to explain why he rejects each one. Specifically, he denies that God is the kind of being who is either pleased or displeased about anything, has knowledge of particular persons, actions, or events, or even can be regarded as the “Creator” of human beings, unless one understands this in purely metaphorical terms. What warrants these conf
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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