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
    Purity-F holds: a form cannot have contrary properties. — Carmelics
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Each form in the infinite hierarchy of forms of largeness is not one.

    Purity-F holds: a form cannot have contrary properties.

    Modality & PossibilityPhilosophy of Language
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Philosophy of LanguageModality & Possibility

    Related

    Each form in the infinite hierarchy of forms of largeness is infinitely many.Each form in the infinite hierarchy of forms of largeness is not one.The property of being one and the property of being many are contraries.

    Similar

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Philosophy of Language
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    By Purity-F, no form can have contrary properties96%Non-Identity holds: a form is not identical to the things that partici...89%Purity-F holds: forms are pure, not mixed with their participants.84%Where there is no contrary form, there is no potentiality (quwwa)84%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: plato-parmenides
    View source passageHide passage
    One way to make sense of this claim is by way of the following chain of reasoning. As we’ve seen, One-over-Many, Self-Predication, and Non-Identity together generate an infinite hierarchy of forms of largeness, each of which partakes of the forms above it in the hierarchy. Thus, L1 partakes of infinitely many forms, L2 partakes of infinitely many forms, L3 partakes of infinitely many forms, and so on. Now there are passages in which Plato appears to assume that forms are as many as the predicate

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective