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
    Just because a set of claims can't be proven inconsistent... — Carmelics
    Home/Trinity
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Van Inwagen has not shown the logical possibility of any Trinity theory.

    Just because a set of claims can't be proven inconsistent in van Inwagen's relative identity logic, it doesn't follow that such claims don't imply a contradiction, or that it is metaphysically possible that all the claims are true.

    Trinity
    ?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

    Trinity

    Key Terms

    Inconsistent
    # Inconsistent Something is **inconsistent** when it contains contradictions or doesn't agree with itself—like saying "I love ice cream" one day and "I hate ice cream" the next day, or a store claiming to be open 24 hours but having locked doors at midnight. In everyday use, it means lacking harmony, reliability, or logical agreement between different statements, actions, or behaviors.
    imply a contradiction(describing consequences of claims)
    When a set of claims logically leads to or results in statements that contradict each other, even if the contradiction isn't immediately obvious.
    metaphysically possible(as used in metaphysics)
    Something that could exist or happen in reality without violating the fundamental laws of nature — not logically contradictory.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Trinity
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    relative identity logic(as a formal logical framework)
    A specialized system of logical rules that allows for a different way of thinking about whether two things are 'the same'—instead of treating identity as all-or-nothing, it permits things to be identical in some respects but not others.
    van Inwagen(as a philosopher being cited as a necessitarian)
    Peter van Inwagen is a contemporary American philosopher who studies questions about what exists, what it means to exist, and whether God must exist.

    Related

    Formal consistency in relative identity logic does not guarantee logical possibi...Sharing a form in relative identity logic with a logically possible proposition ...Van Inwagen has not shown the logical possibility of any Trinity theory.Vohánka concocts a short non-theological story whose claims translate into claim...

    Similar

    Formal consistency in relative identity logic does not guarantee logic...83%Therefore, van Inwagen must assume there is absolute identity and deny...80%Claims 1–3, given transitivity and symmetry of numerical identity, log...76%Sharing a form in relative identity logic with a logically possible pr...75%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: trinity
    View source passageHide passage
    Vlastimil Vohánka (2013) argues that van Inwagen has done nothing to show the logical possibility of any Trinity theory. Just because a set of claims can’t be proven inconsistent in van Inwagen’s relative identity logic, it doesn’t follow that such claims don’t imply a contradiction, or that it is metaphysically possible that all the claims are true. At one point van Inwagen tells a short non-theological story whose claims, when translated into his relative identity logic, have the same forms as the Trinity propositions. The story, he argues, is clearly not self-contradictory; thus, he conclud...

    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