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
    Necessary beings exist in all possible worlds — Carmelics
    Home/Modality & Possibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Had any particular individual failed to exist, that individual's haecceity would still have existed

    Necessary beings exist in all possible worlds

    Modality & 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

    Modality & Possibility

    Related

    Had any particular individual failed to exist, that individual's haecceity would...Haecceities are necessary beings

    Similar

    Contingent beings possibly exist87%Socrates does exist in those possible worlds.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Modality & Possibility
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    86%
    Possible worlds exist.85%
    There are infinitely many possible worlds, each within God's power to ...82%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: possible-worlds
    View source passageHide passage
    On the other hand, haecceitists like Plantinga introduce special properties — haecceities — to similar ends. The haecceity of an individual a is the property of being that very individual, the property being a. A property is a haecceity, then, just in case it is possible that it is the haecceity of some individual.[36] It is a necessary truth that everything has a haecceity. More importantly, for haecceitists, haecceities are necessary beings. Thus, not only is it the case that, had any

    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