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 Plantinga's view can account for the truth of claims about a possible child of Portman and Bush.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.On Kripke's causal-historical account, names and genuine singular terms require an actual grounding event of dubbing or baptism in a real individual.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Plantinga's uninstantiated individual essences lack any causal-historical anchor, making purported singular propositions about them indistinguishable from general existential claims.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A theory that cannot distinguish singular from general propositions about possible individuals fails to vindicate the specifically singular truth conditions it was introduced to explain.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Individual essences, as purely qualitative or haecceitistic entities, cannot be individuated prior to the existence of the individual they are essences of.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If an individual essence cannot be identified without reference to a non-existent individual, positing it merely relocates, rather than resolves, the problem of singular reference to mere possibilia.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.On Plantinga's view, there is an uninstantiated individual essence that could have been instantiated.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Had that individual essence been instantiated, it would have been instantiated by something parented by Portman and Bush.
      ?

      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.