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
    Oderberg is mistaken when he tries to establish the uniqu... — Carmelics
    Home/Natural Theology
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Oderberg is mistaken when he tries to establish the uniqueness of the kalām argument by denying that the Causal Principle plays a role in it.

    Natural Theology
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    2 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Craig's kalām argument explicitly requires that 'whatever begins to exist has a cause,' which is a restricted instance of the Causal Principle.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Oderberg's attempt to distinguish the kalām's first premise from the Causal Principle conflates genetic origin with logical structure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A premise logically entailed by or constituting a special case of a principle thereby depends on that principle for its justification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Al-Ghazali and Ibn Rushd, the medieval sources of the kalām cosmological argument, both grounded temporal origination in a broader principle of sufficient reason for contingent existence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the historical architects of the kalām argument themselves appealed to the Causal Principle, Oderberg cannot coherently claim the argument is structurally independent of it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • The Causal Principle does play a role in the kalām argument: it undergirds the argument's first premise.
      ?

      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

    Natural Theology

    Related

    A premise logically entailed by or constituting a special case of a principle th...Al-Ghazali and Ibn Rushd, the medieval sources of the kalām cosmological argumen...Craig's kalām argument explicitly requires that 'whatever begins to exist has a ...If the historical architects of the kalām argument themselves appealed to the Ca...
    +2 moreShow less
    Oderberg's attempt to distinguish the kalām's first premise from the Causal Prin...The Causal Principle does play a role in the kalām argument: it undergirds the a...

    Similar

    Pascal's Wager proves too much and is therefore not a sound argument f...82%The Causal Principle does play a role in the kalām argument: it underg...82%There is no basis for claiming that the idea of God implies God's actu...81%The inconsistency present in Gödel's original ontological argument is ...79%

    Source

    AI-extracted2/3 agreementValid
    SEP: cosmological-argument
    Against Oderberg 2002
    View source passageHide passage
    The basis for the argument’s first premise is the Causal Principle that undergirds many cosmological arguments. (Oderberg [2002: 308] is mistaken when he tries to establish the uniqueness of the kalām argument by denying that the Causal Principle plays a role in kalām argument. It only does not play a role in supporting a particular premise in the argument.) Defenders and critics alike suggest that basing the argument on the Principle of Causation rather than on the more general Principle of Sufficient Reason is advantageous to the argument (Morriston 2000: 149). Craig holds that the first pre...
    Extraction notes

    Validity: The source passage explicitly states that the Causal Principle undergirds the first premise of the kalām argument and uses this fact to argue that Oderberg is mistaken in denying the Causal Principle plays a role in the kalām argument.

    Confidence: Explicit corrective claim in the text.

    Details

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