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 Not every qua-object of God is a divine Person.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The three divine Persons are themselves essential properties of God on classical Trinitarian doctrine, not contingent relational features.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If Personhood is essential to God's nature, then God-qua-Father, God-qua-Son, and God-qua-Spirit are not relevantly different from God-as-omnipotent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore the distinction between essential and contingent qua-objects cannot by itself explain why some qua-objects are Persons and others are not.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.On Fine's theory of qua-objects, a qua-object x/P is distinct from x only when P is not constitutive of x's identity conditions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Aquinas and the classical tradition hold that in God, esse and essentia are identical, making every real attribute constitutive of divine identity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If every divine attribute is identity-constitutive, then no qua-object of God is genuinely distinct from God, collapsing the framework before the Person/non-Person distinction can be drawn.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Many qua-objects of God are contingent (e.g. God-as-creator, God-as-friend-of-Abraham), and such would not have existed had God not created.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Any qua-object of God which involves only an essential property of his (e.g. God-as-omnipotent) is numerically identical to God.
      ?

      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.