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 'esse' and 'id quod est' differ in sense while suppose... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→The claims that God is esse and God is id quod est are not genuinely contradictory.

    If 'esse' and 'id quod est' differ in sense while supposedly referring to the same divine reality, standard substitution principles yield contradictions in intentional contexts.

    ?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.Frege showed that coreferential terms with different senses create substitution failures in belief contexts without violating logical principles.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Medieval theology explicitly distinguishes essence from existence; treating them as identical in all contexts conflates metaphysical with semantic identity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Standard first-order logic assumes extensionality; intentional contexts require intensional logic where sense-differences legitimately prevent substitution.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The argument conflates de re and de dicto readings; at de re level, identity statements about God preserve substitutivity regardless of sense-differences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Aquinas's 'esse/essentia' distinction operates at metaphysical, not semantic level; applying linguistic substitution rules to ontological claims commits a category error.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If contradictions arise only in intentional contexts, this shows limitations of our concepts, not actual metaphysical inconsistency in divine reality itself.
      ?

      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

    Divine Attributes1 linked

    Related

    Aquinas's 'esse/essentia' distinction operates at metaphysical, not semantic lev...Frege showed that coreferential terms with different senses create substitution ...If contradictions arise only in intentional contexts, this shows limitations of ...Medieval theology explicitly distinguishes essence from existence; treating them...
    +3 moreShow less
    Standard first-order logic assumes extensionality; intentional contexts require ...The argument conflates de re and de dicto readings; at de re level, identity sta...The claims that God is esse and God is id quod est are not genuinely contradicto...

    Details

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