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 If a strongly necessary being such as Allah exists, then certain singular logical truths—such as 'something exists if Allah exists'—are themselves strongly necessary.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Logical truth is grounded in logical form alone, not in the existence of any particular being, however necessary.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A truth like 'something exists if Allah exists' is a material conditional whose necessity derives from logical structure, not from Allah's modal status.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Deriving the strong necessity of a logical truth from a being's necessity conflates the source of modal force with the content of the proposition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kripke's semantics for S5 shows that necessary existence requires truth across all possible worlds, but S3 is a strictly weaker system that cannot license such strong modal closure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the axiom base is S3 rather than S5, singular truths entailed by a being's existence inherit only the modal strength S3 licenses, which falls short of strong necessity as standardly defined by Plantinga and others.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.By axiom S3, if a strongly necessary being exists, then singular logical truths entailed by that being's existence are n-statable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.What is n-statable is strongly necessary.
      ?

      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.