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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that It is not possible even for God to love every person uniformly to the same degree.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Divine love (agape) in the Thomistic and Scotist traditions is not constituted by identification with particular interests but by willing the good of the other as such.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If love is willing the good of another rather than identifying with their contingent desires, incompatible interests pose no obstacle to uniform divine benevolence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Aquinas explicitly distinguishes between God loving all things equally in intensity of will while loving different things to different degrees of good conferred (ST I q.20 a.3).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The argument equivocates between love as partiality—favoring one party's interests over another's—and love as impartial concern for the flourishing of each person.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A perfectly rational and omniscient agent can simultaneously hold incompatible interests in view and promote the best achievable outcome for each party without privileging either, as per Kantian impartiality.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Incompatibility of interests entails a constraint on what outcomes are achievable, not a constraint on the uniformity of the loving disposition directed toward each person.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.People in fact have incompatible interests.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Two interests are incompatible just in case attempts to bring about one of them require that the other be impeded.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Love of the deepest kind has as a necessary constituent identifying with the interests of one's beloved.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.