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 God cannot serve as the locus of the inference for God's existence

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.A sound inference requires the reason property to be uncontroversially present in the locus
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.God's very existence is controversial
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore the reason property cannot be uncontroversially present in God as locus
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.In Nyāya epistemology, the pakṣa (locus) must be a known particular whose existence is established prior to the inference.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Udayana's own Nyāyakusumāñjali concedes God is not perceptually available, making God an unknown particular unfit as pakṣa.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.An inference whose conclusion is the existence of its own locus is viciously circular, as Gaṅgeśa's vyāpti analysis of valid hetu confirms.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Dignāga's pramāṇa theory holds that the locus of inference must be independently accessible to establish sādhya-dharmin identity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If God's existence is the very sādhya being proved, no independent access to God as dharmin is possible without presupposing the conclusion.
      ?

      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.