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 Shared natures cannot explain the individuation of particular things

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.A shared nature can individuate by being instantiated in numerically distinct portions of matter at distinct spatiotemporal locations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Aquinas's hylomorphic account grounds individuation in designated matter (materia signata), which is a mode of the shared nature, not an addition external to it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If matter-as-individuator is itself analyzable within the shared nature framework, the claim that shared natures cannot explain individuation is defeated from within the tradition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Scotus's formal distinction shows that individuality can be a real but non-numerical contraction of a common nature, not a wholly separate principle.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the haecceity is itself a formal aspect continuous with the shared nature rather than ontologically alien to it, the dichotomy between shared natures and individuation collapses.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.All things of a given kind share the same nature in some sense
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A shared nature is common to multiple individuals and therefore cannot distinguish one individual from another
      ?

      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.