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 unclear what constitutes the Persons in Hasker's account.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.In various places Hasker says the Persons are constituted by the divine mind/soul, the concrete divine nature (a trope of divinity), and a single mental substance.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.These would appear to be different claims.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Hasker's 2010 account identifies Persons as 'individual minds' emergent from the divine nature, while his 2013 account treats them as modes of a single substance.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Emergent individuals and modes are categorically distinct metaphysical entities in the tradition running from Locke through contemporary trope theory.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A theory of divine Persons that oscillates between categorically distinct ontological kinds is not a single coherent account but multiple incompatible accounts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Hasker invokes both Brian Leftow's 'one soul, three streams of consciousness' model and his own 'social trinity' framework in characterizing the Persons.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Leftow's model entails numerical identity of the mental substance across Persons, while social trinitarianism requires three numerically distinct substances.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Deploying constitutive concepts that presuppose contradictory identity conditions for the same entities demonstrates irreducible unclarity in the account.
      ?

      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.