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 cosmos is contingent, sharing a key similarity with i... — Carmelics
    Home/Natural Theology
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The cosmos is contingent, sharing a key similarity with its content.

    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.Both the cosmos and its content are contingent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the components of the universe are contingent, the universe itself is contingent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The inference from parts to whole commits the fallacy of composition, as wholes can possess properties absent from their constituents.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Bertrand Russell noted the cosmos as a brute fact needs no explanation beyond itself, making contingency attribution to the whole unwarranted.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Spinoza's monism entails that the totality of existence is necessarily self-caused (causa sui), making the cosmos necessary rather than contingent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the cosmos is identical to God or Nature (Deus sive Natura), attributing contingency to it conflates modal categories that apply only to finite modes.
      ?

      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

    Related

    Bertrand Russell noted the cosmos as a brute fact needs no explanation beyond it...Both the cosmos and its content are contingent.If the components of the universe are contingent, the universe itself is conting...If the cosmos is identical to God or Nature (Deus sive Natura), attributing cont...
    +2 moreShow less
    Spinoza's monism entails that the totality of existence is necessarily self-caus...The inference from parts to whole commits the fallacy of composition, as wholes ...

    Similar

    Both the cosmos and its content are contingent.91%If the components of the universe are contingent, the universe itself ...83%The universe, which is composed of only contingent beings, is continge...82%There exists a first cause or ground of the cosmos that is, at least i...79%

    Source

    AI-extracted2/3 agreementValid
    SEP: cosmological-argument
    Defenders of the argument
    View source passageHide passage
    Defenders of the argument respond that there is a key similarity between the cosmos and its content, namely, both are contingent. However, why should we think that the cosmos is contingent? Defenders of the view contend that if the components of the universe are contingent, the universe itself is contingent. Russell replies that the move from the contingency of the components of the universe to the contingency of the universe commits the Fallacy of Composition, which mistakenly concludes that since the parts have a certain property, the whole likewise has that property. Hence, whereas we legit...
    Extraction notes

    If the components of the universe are contingent (premise 1) and contingency of components entails contingency of the whole (premise 2), then it logically follows that the cosmos is contingent, sharing the property of contingency with its content.

    Validity:

    Confidence: Clearly stated argument by defenders of the cosmological argument.

    Details

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