Skip to content

Topics Thinkers Changes ContributorsLoading 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

Made within

DC&

Austin

Statements: 321,452
Perspectives: 108,905
Topics: 42

No person is a property instance—not God, not me, not Soc... — Carmelics

Home/Divine Attributes

History Edit See Inverse

No person is a property instance—not God, not me, not Socrates.

Divine Attributes

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

1 reason for

2 reasons against

Reasons For

1 perspective

Reason for

?

1.Concrete individuals cannot be identified with property instances.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.Persons (including God) are concrete individuals.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

Reasons Against

2 perspectives

Reason against 1 of 2

?

1.Bundle theory (Hume, Russell) holds that concrete individuals just are clusters of co-instantiated properties, not substances distinct from them.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.If bundle theory is correct, a person just is a property instance or set thereof, undermining the premise that persons are categorically distinct from property instances.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

Reason against 2 of 2

?

1.Platonist theologians like Plotinus identify the One with the Form of the Good, treating the highest being as identical to a universal or pure actuality.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.If divine simplicity requires God to be identical to His own nature, and natures are abstract property-like entities, then God's mode of existence may be sui generis and not governed by the concrete/abstract distinction that applies to creatures like Socrates.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

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

Next step

Based on where you are in your exploration

Strongest counterpoint

Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

Topics

Divine Attributes

Related

Bundle theory (Hume, Russell) holds that concrete individuals just are clusters ...Concrete individuals cannot be identified with property instances.If bundle theory is correct, a person just is a property instance or set thereof...If divine simplicity requires God to be identical to His own nature, and natures...

+2 moreShow less

Persons (including God) are concrete individuals.Platonist theologians like Plotinus identify the One with the Form of the Good, ...

Similar

Concrete individuals cannot be identified with property instances.85%For every concrete individual x, if x is a person, then x is a propert...84%Essential property instances of God are not more dependent on God than...76%God is unique in his mode of property-possession.75%

Source

AI-extracted

SEP: divine-simplicity

View source passageHide passage

Rich Properties and Haecceity Properties. Socrates can exist without his rich property; ergo, he can exist without his rich property instance; ergo, Socrates cannot be a rich property instance or any property instance. The truth of the initial premise is fallout from the definition of ‘rich property.’ The R of x is a conjunctive property each conjunct of which is a property of x. Thus Socrates’ rich property includes (has as a conjunct) the property of being married to Xanthippe. But Socrates might not have had that property, whence it follows that he might not have had R. (If R has C as a con...

Details

Type: claim
Perspectives: 3 (1 for, 2 against)
Edits: 1 edit