Since kalām, Thomistic, and Leibnizian arguments all terminate their regress by positing a necessary being, Kant's transcendental dialectic refutes the shared terminus rather than a version-specific premise.
?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.
kalām(Islamic theological tradition that Fārābī's Perfect City structurally mirrors but methodologically opposes)
A tradition of theological treatises and methods whose typical structure proceeds from God's existence, unity, attributes, and acts, to God's creation including human beings, to prophecy, the religious community, and the afterlife or return to God
necessary being(Theistic metaphysics)
A being that exists and is God in every possible world
terminus(Contrasted with subiectum in theories of transmutation)
The end-point or term of a change
version-specific premise(as a logical distinction)
An assumption unique to one particular type of argument (like something only Thomistic philosophy assumes) rather than something all three argument types share.