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
    Statement 6 is impossible — Carmelics
    Home/Trinity
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Statement 6 is impossible

    Trinity
    ?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.Generation is some sort of causing or originating
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Nothing can cause or originate itself
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Statement 6 would require something to generate itself
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.In aseity theology (Aquinas, ST Ia.2.3), God's existence is self-grounded such that 'self-causation' applies only in an analogical, not univocal, sense.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If 'generation' in Trinitarian theology denotes logical or ontological dependence rather than efficient causation, P1's causal reading of generation is equivocal.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A being whose essence just is existence (esse ipsum subsistens) may instantiate a sui generis self-constituting relation that violates no causal principle applicable to contingent things.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Process theologians (Whitehead, Hartshorne) argue that divine self-creativity is a coherent primitive, making self-generation conceptually available as a foundational category.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.P2 ('nothing can cause itself') presupposes the Humean-Aristotelian causal asymmetry principle, which is not a logical necessity but a contingent metaphysical assumption.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If Statement 6 is interpreted as expressing reflexive identity rather than temporal self-origination, the impossibility charge conflates ontological priority with causal production.
      ?

      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

    Trinity

    Related

    A being whose essence just is existence (esse ipsum subsistens) may instantiate ...Generation is some sort of causing or originatingIf 'generation' in Trinitarian theology denotes logical or ontological dependenc...If Statement 6 is interpreted as expressing reflexive identity rather than tempo...
    +5 moreShow less
    In aseity theology (Aquinas, ST Ia.2.3), God's existence is self-grounded such t...Nothing can cause or originate itselfP2 ('nothing can cause itself') presupposes the Humean-Aristotelian causal asymm...Process theologians (Whitehead, Hartshorne) argue that divine self-creativity is...Statement 6 would require something to generate itself

    Similar

    Statement 6 would require something to generate itself72%Under another interpretation the argument is invalid because statement...67%The argument from premises 1, 2, and 5 to statement 6 is either sound ...64%Belief in the Christian Incarnation cannot be achieved by virtue of re...63%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: trinity
    View source passageHide passage
    Creedal orthodoxy requires 1–3 and 5, yet 1–3 imply the unorthodox 4, and 1, 2 and 5 imply the unorthodox (and necessarily false) statement 6. So what to do? Lines 1–4 seem perfectly clear, and the inference from 1–3 to 4 seems valid. So too does the inference from 1, 2, and 5 to 6. Why should 6 be thought impossible? The idea is that whatever its precise meaning, “generation” is some sort of causing or originating, something in principle nothing can do to itself. One would expect Leftow, as a o
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit