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 First Being is perfect, with no deficiency or privation.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.A being whose perfection is logically necessary lacks the freedom to be otherwise, collapsing perfection into mere necessity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Genuine perfection requires the capacity for self-determination, which al-Farabi's necessitarian First Being structurally cannot possess.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore the First Being satisfies a formal criterion of perfection while failing the substantive criterion that perfection entails.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Privation is defined relative to a nature's proper end; without a determinate nature distinct from existence, privation becomes inapplicable rather than impossible.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If privation cannot apply to the First Being, the claim that it lacks privation is trivially true and uninformative about genuine perfection.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.If the First Being were deprived of some property F, it would have the potentiality to be F.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The First Being has no potentiality for any predicate it does not already possess by its essence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore the First Being cannot be deprived of any property.
      ?

      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.