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 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.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 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

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 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 against 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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.