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 cause of the aggregate of all contingent things must ... — Carmelics
    Home/Natural Theology
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→The necessarily existing thing that causes the aggregate of all contingent things is God.

    The cause of the aggregate of all contingent things must be a necessarily existing thing.

    Natural Theology
    ?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.The existence of the aggregate of all contingent things requires a cause external to the aggregate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.All contingently existing things are members of the aggregate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, the external cause cannot itself be contingent, since all contingent things are already within the aggregate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The aggregate of all contingent things need not have a cause, since causal principles apply to members within sets, not to sets themselves.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.David Hume argued in the Dialogues that explaining each member of a collection explains the collection, making a further cause of the whole explanatorily redundant.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Bertrand Russell defended this 'Fallacy of Composition' diagnosis: what is true of parts need not be true of wholes, so causal dependency does not transfer from members to the aggregate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Necessary existence may be an incoherent or meaningless predicate when applied to concrete beings, as Kant argued in the Critique of Pure Reason against the ontological proof.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If 'necessary existence' means only that we cannot conceive the being's non-existence, this is a merely epistemic fact that establishes no ontological conclusion about what must exist outside the aggregate.
      ?

      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

    Natural Theology

    Connections

    3 topics

    Divine Attributes2 linkedCausation1 linkedModality & Possibility1 linked

    Related

    All contingently existing things are members of the aggregate.Bertrand Russell defended this 'Fallacy of Composition' diagnosis: what is true ...David Hume argued in the Dialogues that explaining each member of a collection e...If 'necessary existence' means only that we cannot conceive the being's non-exis...
    +6 moreShow less
    Necessary existence may be an incoherent or meaningless predicate when applied t...The aggregate of all contingent things need not have a cause, since causal princ...

    Similar

    The necessarily existing thing that causes the aggregate of all contin...97%The existence of the aggregate of all contingent things requires a cau...93%The aggregate of all contingent things cannot exist without a cause.93%The aggregate of all contingent things cannot exist without a cause ex...93%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: natural-theology
    View source passageHide passage
    Avicenna next considers the aggregate of all the existing contingent individual things, the existence of each of which is accounted for by its causal antecedents. He then proposes and evaluates four options for accounting for the aggregate’s existence. The first is that the existence of the aggregate does not require a cause. However, given the principle that the existence of any contingent thing must have a cause, the aggregate would then have to exist necessarily. But the aggregate’s existing

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit
    The existence of the aggregate of all contingent things requires a cause externa...
    The necessarily existing thing that causes the aggregate of all contingent thing...
    There are further considerations that identify the necessarily existing thing as...
    Therefore, the external cause cannot itself be contingent, since all contingent ...