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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that The cosmological argument is defective.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The cosmological argument can terminate in a necessary being identified through causal and modal reasoning without invoking the ontological argument's conceptual proof.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Aquinas's Third Way identifies necessity through dependency relations in the causal order, not through analysis of the concept of a most real being.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Kant's charge of dependence on the ontological argument conflates the epistemic route to God's attributes with the logical structure of the existence proof itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The principle of sufficient reason, defended by Leibniz and later Pruss, grounds the inference to a necessary being in rational metaphysics, not mere conceptual analysis.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If every contingent fact demands an explanation and no infinite regress of contingent causes suffices, a necessary being follows without presupposing its own concept guarantees existence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The cosmological argument proceeds from an empirical premise about my existence to the existence of an unconditioned, absolutely necessary being whose nonexistence is impossible.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The properties of this absolutely necessary being can be determined not through experience but only through reason, from a priori concepts alone.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The only concept that suffices to determine the properties of an absolutely necessary being is that of a most real being, so the concept of an absolutely necessary being presupposes that concept.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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