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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Finite human minds are not the source of motion in bodies.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Descartes' interactionist account holds that mind and body form a genuine union, with the pineal gland as the locus of causal exchange.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The mere absence of observed necessary connection does not eliminate real causal power, as Malebranche's own critics (e.g., Arnauld) argued that occasionalism conflates epistemic and ontological limits.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If finite minds routinely correlate specific volitions with specific bodily motions, the burden of proof lies with the denial of efficient causation, not its affirmation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Leibniz's pre-established harmony preserves genuine mental causation within each substance's own series, making finite minds true sources of their representational and appetitive states.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.God's conservation of a quantity of motion is compatible with finite minds initiating motion if God's decree itself constitutes a standing permission for such transfers, as Leibniz's vis viva framework suggests.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Human minds cannot affect their own bodies in certain ways, either because some bodily processes are immune to voluntary influence or because of old age or injury.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Restricting ourselves to observation, we never experience a causal connection between volitions and bodily actions, only temporal succession.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If finite minds could produce motion in bodies at will, it would upset God's conserved quantity of motion in the world.
      ?

      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.