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 not human artefacts — Carmelics
    Home/Natural Theology
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

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

    Dyads are not human artefacts

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Natural Theology

    Connections

    1 topic

    Divine Attributes1 linked

    Related

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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Natural Theology
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Dyads are the most basic composite things made out of atoms, and everything else...
    If dyads have a maker, that maker is aware of everything, given the definition o...

    Similar

    The resemblance between the universe (W) and human artifacts (Ys) is i...74%Therefore natural products do not share a type with artefacts under Dh...74%There is a vast difference between the universe (W) and human artifact...74%Human beings are not purely material things.72%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    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)

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective