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 claims that God is esse and God is id quod est are no... — Carmelics
    Home/Divine Attributes
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The claims that God is esse and God is id quod est are not genuinely contradictory.

    Divine Attributes
    ?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 apparent contradiction between God being esse and God being id quod est arises because of a deficiency in our mode of speaking.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The laws of logic apply to God, and not just anything can be correctly affirmed of God.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Esse signifies pure act without suppositum, while id quod est signifies a subsistent subject that has being, making them categorically distinct.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Boethius himself in De Hebdomadibus treats this distinction as logically real, not merely linguistic, since it grounds the difference between God and creatures.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If the distinction were only in our mode of speaking, divine simplicity would be a doctrine about human cognition rather than divine ontology, undermining its theological function.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Frege's distinction between sense and reference establishes that co-referential terms can differ in cognitive content in ways that generate genuine logical asymmetries.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If 'esse' and 'id quod est' differ in sense while supposedly referring to the same divine reality, standard substitution principles yield contradictions in intentional contexts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Aquinas's own analogical predication theory concedes our concepts inadequately capture God, which entails we cannot confidently rule out real rather than merely apparent 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 Attributes

    Related

    Aquinas's own analogical predication theory concedes our concepts inadequately c...Boethius himself in De Hebdomadibus treats this distinction as logically real, n...Esse signifies pure act without suppositum, while id quod est signifies a subsis...Frege's distinction between sense and reference establishes that co-referential ...
    +4 moreShow less
    If 'esse' and 'id quod est' differ in sense while supposedly referring to the sa...If the distinction were only in our mode of speaking, divine simplicity would be...The apparent contradiction between God being esse and God being id quod est aris...The laws of logic apply to God, and not just anything can be correctly affirmed ...

    Similar

    The apparent contradiction between God being esse and God being id quo...89%God must be both Being (esse) and a being (id quod est).84%Therefore, esse cannot be understood as separate from essentia.74%We can have good reason to believe something is both X and Y even if w...72%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: divine-simplicity

    Details

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