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 Peter van Inwagen's materialist resurrection model—God preserves the exact corpse and reconstitutes it—demonstrates a coherent physicalist afterlife framework.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The model requires God to miraculously preserve matter scattered across billions of years—requiring unexplained metaphysical mechanisms.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Identity through material continuity alone cannot ground psychological continuity, undermining what makes the resurrected person *me*.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The model implausibly requires God to track every atom from billions of deceased humans across cosmic time without physical infrastructure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Van Inwagen's model avoids Platonic dualism by keeping the afterlife physically grounded in actual matter, preserving physicalist ontology.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.God's preservation of the original corpse solves the composition problem: the resurrected person is numerically identical to the original.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.This framework matches ordinary intuitions about personal identity better than competing materialist models like gradual replacement or fission.
      ?

      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.