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
    Dyads are a suitable locus for the inference to God's exi... — Carmelics
    Home/Natural Theology
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Dyads are a suitable locus for the inference to God's existence

    Natural Theology
    ?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.Dyads are the most basic composite things made out of atoms, and everything else is made out of them
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Dyads are not human artefacts
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If dyads have a maker, that maker is aware of everything, given the definition of a maker and that dyads are the basis of all things
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Dyads can arise from the inherent combining capacity (shakti) of atoms themselves, requiring no external conscious agent as cause.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Vaisheshika's own category of 'unseen force' (adrishta) provides a sufficient immanent causal mechanism for atomic combination without invoking omniscience.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The inference from 'dyads have a maker' to 'that maker is omniscient' commits a non-sequitur: awareness of dyads does not entail awareness of all things.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Nyaya's own epistemology demands that inferences be grounded in observed co-presence (vyapti), but no observed maker of basic particles has ever been correlated with omniscience.
      ?

      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

    Natural Theology

    Connections

    1 topic

    Divine Attributes1 linked

    Related

    Dyads are not human artefactsDyads are the most basic composite things made out of atoms, and everything else...Dyads can arise from the inherent combining capacity (shakti) of atoms themselve...If dyads have a maker, that maker is aware of everything, given the definition o...
    +3 moreShow less
    Nyaya's own epistemology demands that inferences be grounded in observed co-pres...The inference from 'dyads have a maker' to 'that maker is omniscient' commits a ...Vaisheshika's own category of 'unseen force' (adrishta) provides a sufficient im...

    Similar

    God cannot serve as the locus of the inference for God's existence90%'Everything in the world' cannot serve as the locus of the inference f...83%Pascal's Wager presupposes that one should have a probability for God'...80%A God would be likely to provide convincing evidence of Her existence77%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: early-modern-india
    View source passageHide passage
    Comments: (1) Why does The Manual of Reason take dyads to be the locus of the inference? This is, in fact, a clever move. Obviously, we cannot take God to be the locus (e.g. God exists, because…), for then the first criterion on a sound inference will not be met—the reason property, whatever it is, cannot be uncontroversially present in a locus whose very existence is controversial. We can’t take the locus to be “everything in the world”, for many such things are not effects (e.g. atoms, space)
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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