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
    Omni-theism is no more probable intrinsically than aesthe... — Carmelics
    Home/Divine Attributes
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Omni-theism is no more probable intrinsically than aesthetic deism.

    Divine AttributesNatural 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.On Humean motivational theory, even omniscience cannot guarantee action without a corresponding desire, making omni-theism's explanatory gap equal to aesthetic deism's.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Swinburne's inference from omniscience to benevolent action presupposes internalist moral realism, which is itself contested and cannot be assumed in prior probability assessments.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Without an independent argument for divine conativism, omni-theism and aesthetic deism are symmetrically incomplete as explanations of why a perfect being would create anything.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Leibniz's principle of sufficient reason, applied consistently, demands explanation for why a necessary being actualizes this world rather than none, a burden omni-theism shares with deism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Aesthetic deism posits a creator motivated by beauty rather than moral goodness, but Iris Murdoch's account treats goodness and beauty as co-convergent transcendentals, eliminating the asymmetry Swinburne needs.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Swinburne's challenge to aesthetic deism succeeds only if merely believing that an action is good entails a desire to do that action (motivational intellectualism).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.On most theories of motivation, there is a logical gap between the intellect and desire.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If such a gap exists, omni-theism faces the same problem as aesthetic deism in explaining why an omniscient being acts on what it knows to be best.
      ?

      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 AttributesNatural Theology

    Connections

    2 topics

    Free Will & Foreknowledge2 linkedConsciousness & Mind1 linked

    Related

    Aesthetic deism posits a creator motivated by beauty rather than moral goodness,...If such a gap exists, omni-theism faces the same problem as aesthetic deism in e...Leibniz's principle of sufficient reason, applied consistently, demands explanat...On Humean motivational theory, even omniscience cannot guarantee action without ...
    +4 moreShow less
    On most theories of motivation, there is a logical gap between the intellect and...Swinburne's challenge to aesthetic deism succeeds only if merely believing that ...Swinburne's inference from omniscience to benevolent action presupposes internal...

    Similar

    Omni-theism is many times less probable intrinsically than source idea...86%Aesthetic deism is defined to be nearly identical to omni-theism in or...82%Aesthetic deism is stipulated to share all core metaphysical commitmen...81%The basis of genuine theism is the beauty and order discovered in the ...80%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: atheism-agnosticism
    View source passageHide passage
    In spite of the nearly complete overlap between omni-theism and aesthetic deism, Richard Swinburne (2004: 96–109) would challenge premise (1) on the grounds that aesthetic deism, unlike omni-theism, must posit a bad desire to account for why the deity does not do what is morally best. Omni-theism need not do this, according to Swinburne, because what is morally best just is what is overall best, and thus an omniscient being will of necessity do what is morally best so long as it has no desires
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Without an independent argument for divine conativism, omni-theism and aesthetic...
    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit