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
    Space exists necessarily — Carmelics
    Home/Divine Attributes
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Space exists necessarily

    Divine AttributesModality & Possibility
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.To suppose any part of space removed is to suppose it removed from and out of itself
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.To suppose the whole of space to be taken away is to suppose it taken away from itself while it still remains
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Supposing space to be taken away while it still remains is a contradiction in terms
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Clarke's argument conflates conceivability with possibility: failing to imagine space's removal may reflect cognitive limits, not metaphysical necessity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Kant demonstrates that space is a form of human intuition, making it epistemically indispensable but not an independently necessary existent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A condition being necessary for thought or experience does not entail that it exists necessarily as a mind-independent feature of reality.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Leibniz argues space is relational—a system of possible co-existences among substances—meaning space without objects is not a genuine entity that could 'remain.'
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If space is relational rather than absolute, Clarke's reductio fails: removing all matter removes the relations constituting space, with no remainder to generate contradiction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Divine AttributesModality & Possibility

    Connections

    2 linked claims · 2 topics

    Proof of definition segments3 linkedNatural Theology1 linked
    If God exists necessarily, then God exists.Substance exists necessarily.

    Related

    A condition being necessary for thought or experience does not entail that it ex...Clarke's argument conflates conceivability with possibility: failing to imagine ...If God exists necessarily, then God exists.If space is relational rather than absolute, Clarke's reductio fails: removing a...
    +6 moreShow less
    Kant demonstrates that space is a form of human intuition, making it epistemical...Leibniz argues space is relational—a system of possible co-existences among subs...

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: clarke
    View source passageHide passage
    According to Clarke, the ideas of space and time are the two “first and most obvious simple Ideas, that every man has in his mind” (D 114, W 2.752), anticipating the first step in an argument made famous by Kant. Drawing on an argument from Newton (1726, 410), he argued that while matter can be thought of as non-existing, space exists necessarily because “to suppose any part of space removed, is to suppose it removed from and out of itself: and to suppose the whole to be taken away, is supposing
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Substance exists necessarily.
    Supposing space to be taken away while it still remains is a contradiction in te...
    To suppose any part of space removed is to suppose it removed from and out of it...
    To suppose the whole of space to be taken away is to suppose it taken away from ...
    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit