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
    Esse signifies pure act without suppositum, while id quod... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→The claims that God is esse and God is id quod est are not genuinely contradictory.

    Esse signifies pure act without suppositum, while id quod est signifies a subsistent subject that has being, making them categorically distinct.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Esse as pure act must be categorically distinct from id quod est because act and subject are fundamentally different modes of existing.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Subsistent subjects require a principle of individuation that pure act (as infinite) cannot possess, marking essential categorical difference.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Classical metaphysics distinguishes actuality from the substrate receiving it; esse and id quod est reflect this foundational distinction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.If esse is 'pure act without suppositum,' it becomes unintelligible—acts require bearers; pure actuality without substrate is conceptually incoherent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The claim conflates logical distinction with categorical distinction; esse and id quod est may differ analytically without categorical separation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.In creatures, being (esse) and what-has-being (id quod est) are inseparably instantiated together; categorical distinctness overstates their metaphysical separation.
      ?

      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.

    Connections

    1 topic

    Divine Attributes1 linked

    Related

    Classical metaphysics distinguishes actuality from the substrate receiving it; e...Esse as pure act must be categorically distinct from id quod est because act and...If esse is 'pure act without suppositum,' it becomes unintelligible—acts require...In creatures, being (esse) and what-has-being (id quod est) are inseparably inst...
    +3 moreShow less
    Subsistent subjects require a principle of individuation that pure act (as infin...The claim conflates logical distinction with categorical distinction; esse and i...The claims that God is esse and God is id quod est are not genuinely contradicto...

    Details

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