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
    If each contingent being in an infinite series is explain... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→What sufficiently causes or fully adequately explains the existence of contingent beings must include a non-contingent (necessary) being, and therefore a necessary being exists.

    If each contingent being in an infinite series is explained by its predecessor, the series as a whole need not have an explanation beyond its members.

    ?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.Explanation is fundamentally relational: if A explains B and B explains C, then A's existence suffices to explain C without additional justification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.An infinite regress of explanations is logically coherent and requires no external ground if each step is internally consistent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Demanding explanation of the series itself commits a category error: wholes need not have properties beyond their compositional parts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Explaining each member's existence by reference to prior members leaves unexplained why the entire chain exists rather than nothing.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.An infinite series composed entirely of dependent beings cannot collectively be self-sustaining; dependence cannot generate independence through accumulation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The principle that every contingent fact requires explanation is either true universally or not—applying it selectively to members but not the aggregate is inconsistent.
      ?

      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

    Natural Theology1 linked

    Related

    An infinite regress of explanations is logically coherent and requires no extern...An infinite series composed entirely of dependent beings cannot collectively be ...Demanding explanation of the series itself commits a category error: wholes need...Explaining each member's existence by reference to prior members leaves unexplai...
    +3 moreShow less
    Explanation is fundamentally relational: if A explains B and B explains C, then ...The principle that every contingent fact requires explanation is either true uni...What sufficiently causes or fully adequately explains the existence of contingen...

    Details

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