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
    The argument from premises 1, 2, and 5 to statement 6 is ... — Carmelics
    Home/Trinity
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The argument from premises 1, 2, and 5 to statement 6 is either sound but not heretical, or unsound due to invalidity

    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.Premises 1 and 2 are unclear and admit multiple interpretations
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Under one interpretation the argument is sound but the conclusion is not heretical
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Under another interpretation the argument is invalid because statement 6 does not follow from premises 1, 2, and 5
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The disjunction 'sound but not heretical OR unsound due to invalidity' commits a false dichotomy by excluding a third possibility.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.An argument can be unsound due to false premises rather than invalidity, which the claim's disjunction structurally ignores.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Arius and later Socinians demonstrated that orthodox Trinitarian premises themselves can be coherently rejected, making the argument unsound via premise falsity rather than invalidity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Peter Geach and Peter van Inwagen's relative identity solution entails that the argument from premises 1, 2, and 5 is both valid and sound under standard identity logic.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If relative identity is false and classical Leibniz-style identity holds, statement 6 follows necessarily from premises 1, 2, and 5, rendering the argument valid and its conclusion genuinely heretical.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The claim that the argument escapes heresy only by becoming invalid therefore presupposes a contentious metaphysics of identity that cannot be assumed without argument.
      ?

      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

    An argument can be unsound due to false premises rather than invalidity, which t...Arius and later Socinians demonstrated that orthodox Trinitarian premises themse...If relative identity is false and classical Leibniz-style identity holds, statem...Peter Geach and Peter van Inwagen's relative identity solution entails that the ...
    +5 moreShow less
    Premises 1 and 2 are unclear and admit multiple interpretationsThe claim that the argument escapes heresy only by becoming invalid therefore pr...The disjunction 'sound but not heretical OR unsound due to invalidity' commits a...Under another interpretation the argument is invalid because statement 6 does no...Under one interpretation the argument is sound but the conclusion is not heretic...

    Similar

    The argument from premises 1–3 to statement 4 is either sound but not ...91%Under another interpretation the argument is invalid because statement...89%Under another interpretation the argument is invalid because statement...80%Under one interpretation the argument is sound but the conclusion is n...77%

    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