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 the existence of each contingent thing is fully explai... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→A chain of possible things cannot regress infinitely and must terminate in a being that is necessary in itself

    If the existence of each contingent thing is fully explained by its proximate contingent cause, no further explanation of the aggregate is logically demanded 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.If each member of a set has a complete explanation, no logical gap remains requiring explanation of the set itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Composition poses no new explanatory burden—explaining parts exhausts what needs explaining about their aggregate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Demanding explanation of the whole beyond its explained parts commits the mereological fallacy.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The existence of the aggregate itself—that these parts compose one unified system—is logically distinct from their individual existence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Explaining why each domino falls doesn't explain why they all fell in sequence; compositional facts require compositional explanation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Infinite regress of contingent causes demands explanation of why this infinite chain exists rather than nothing.
      ?

      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

    2 topics

    Natural Theology1 linkedDivine Attributes1 linked

    Related

    A chain of possible things cannot regress infinitely and must terminate in a bei...Composition poses no new explanatory burden—explaining parts exhausts what needs...Demanding explanation of the whole beyond its explained parts commits the mereol...Explaining why each domino falls doesn't explain why they all fell in sequence; ...
    +3 moreShow less
    If each member of a set has a complete explanation, no logical gap remains requi...Infinite regress of contingent causes demands explanation of why this infinite c...The existence of the aggregate itself—that these parts compose one unified syste...

    Details

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