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 existence of the First is a sufficient cause of the existence of the First's first effect

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.A sufficient cause requires not merely the existence of the cause but also the obtaining of relevant causal conditions or relations between cause and effect.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Al-Farabi's argument conflates the First's existence being necessary for the effect with its being sufficient, which are logically distinct modal claims.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Avicenna's distinction between existence and essence shows that even a necessary existent's existence does not automatically determine what effects flow from it without additional analysis of its nature.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Occasionalist thinkers like Al-Ghazali denied that any created or even uncreated being possesses inherent causal sufficiency, locating all productive power in divine will.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If causal sufficiency requires an act of will or determination beyond mere existence, then bare existence—even of the First—cannot alone constitute a sufficient cause.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Al-Farabi's emanationist model illicitly imports Neoplatonic necessity into causation, bypassing the voluntarist requirement that a cause must actively determine its effect.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The First must be able to produce at least one first effect without an instrument or substratum
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.In the case where no instrument or substratum is involved, nothing other than the First's existence is present to serve as a cause
      ?

      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.