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 essences are not mind-independent universals but rathe... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→God is identical to his existence.

    If essences are not mind-independent universals but rather abstractions from particulars, as nominalists like Ockham contend, then the essence-existence distinction dissolves for creatures and cannot anchor the contrast with divine simplicity.

    ?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.Nominalism denies abstract universals exist independently, making essences dependent on minds or particulars rather than transcendent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If essences are mind-dependent abstractions, creatures cannot possess a constitutive essence-existence split that God lacks.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Without this metaphysical distinction in creatures, the purported contrast with divine simplicity loses its foundational support.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Nominalists can ground essence-existence distinction in real causal dependence between particular essences and their exemplifications.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Abstractness need not be mind-dependent; essences could be abstractions from particulars yet still constitute real metaphysical distinctions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Divine simplicity could contrast with creatures even if both lack transcendent universals—God's being could still differ in composition fundamentally.
      ?

      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.

    Key Terms

    Creatures(theology and metaphysics)
    In philosophical and theological contexts, living beings—particularly used here to mean individual entities like individual people (Socrates being an example).
    Ockham
    # Ockham Ockham refers to William of Ockham, a medieval English philosopher (1287-1347) famous for the principle "Ockham's Razor," which states that simpler explanations are usually better than complicated ones—you shouldn't add unnecessary ideas or assumptions when a straightforward answer works. He's influential in philosophy and science because his thinking encouraged people to cut away needless complexity and focus on what's actually necessary to explain something. Today, scientists and thinkers still use his principle when choosing between competing theories.
    abstractions from particulars(as used in metaphysics)
    General ideas we create in our minds by looking at specific individual things—like forming the concept 'cat' by observing many different individual cats.
    divine simplicity(Central to both Malebranche's theodicy and his epistemology)
    A divine attribute functioning as a side constraint on God's actions, requiring God to act through simple means.
    essence-existence distinction(Medieval philosophy, employed by Descartes in the ontological argument)
    The traditional medieval distinction holding that one can say what something is (its essence) prior to knowing whether it exists, with God as the sole exception whose essence just is to exist
    essences(as used in metaphysics)
    The core qualities or properties that make something what it fundamentally is—like 'being a dog' is part of what makes a dog a dog, rather than a cat.
    mind-independent universals(as used in metaphysics)
    General qualities or patterns (like 'redness' or 'being round') that exist objectively in reality, separate from what anyone thinks about them.
    nominalism(Metaphysics; opposed to realism about universals)
    The view that abstract entities such as properties or universals do not exist, and that predicative facts must be explained without appealing to such entities.

    Connections

    1 linked claim · 1 topic

    Divine Attributes1 linked
    God is identical to his existence.

    Related

    Abstractness need not be mind-dependent; essences could be abstractions from par...Divine simplicity could contrast with creatures even if both lack transcendent u...God is identical to his existence.

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit
    If essences are mind-dependent abstractions, creatures cannot possess a constitu...
    +3 moreShow less
    Nominalism denies abstract universals exist independently, making essences depen...Nominalists can ground essence-existence distinction in real causal dependence b...Without this metaphysical distinction in creatures, the purported contrast with ...