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 is the only pure one — a one that is not also many

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The Christian doctrine of the Trinity holds that God is numerically one substance yet genuinely three distinct persons, making divine unity irreducibly complex.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If a coherent monotheistic tradition can maintain that the divine nature is both one and internally differentiated, then pure undifferentiated unity is not a necessary condition for being God.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Al-Farabi's argument assumes Neoplatonic simplicity as the only model of divinity, but this begs the question against traditions where relational complexity is internal to the divine nature.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Spinoza's substance monism holds that God or Nature is the one infinite substance, yet this substance necessarily expresses itself through infinitely many attributes and modes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the infinite richness of attributes is not accidental but essential to what it means to be the one ultimate reality, then being-one and being-many are not mutually exclusive at the divine level.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Al-Farabi's regress argument assumes that unity and multiplicity are always externally related, but internal self-differentiation within a single being dissolves the regress without requiring bare simplicity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.To avoid infinite regress, the source of unity extrinsic to accidental ones must itself be purely one and not also many
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Any thing other than God that is called 'one' is many as well as one
      ?

      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.