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
    If x has a proper part, then x is not simple. — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Divine Attributes
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→If x has a part that instantiates F and a part that instantiates G, and F and G are incompatible properties, then x is not simple.

    If x has a proper part, then x is not simple.

    Divine AttributesModality & Possibility
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Divine AttributesModality & Possibility

    Connections

    1 topic

    Against an attribute of God2 linked

    Related

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Divine Attributes
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    If the parts instantiating F and G are not identical, then x has at least two pa...If x has a part that instantiates F and a part that instantiates G, and F and G ...If x has a part that instantiates F and a part that instantiates G, and F and G ...If x has at least two parts, then at least one of those parts is a proper part o...

    Similar

    If x has at least two parts, then at least one of those parts is a pro...88%If x has a part that instantiates F and a part that instantiates G, an...81%If the parts instantiating F and G are not identical, then x has at le...78%What is many or has parts cannot be the simple One77%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: location-mereology
    View source passageHide passage
    The argument is valid and (14) is clearly true. If x has a part that instantiates F and a part that instantiates G, then, provided that these properties are incompatible, the parts in question are not identical. So x has at least two parts. So at least one of them must be a proper part of x, in which case x is not simple.

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective