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 is simple, i.e., has no internal composition

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Aquinas holds that God's simplicity is compatible with real conceptual distinctions between divine attributes like goodness and power.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If real conceptual distinctions within God are coherent, then the First may have a form of internal differentiation without causal dependence on anything prior.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Al-Farabi's argument from causation rules out material and formal composition but does not entail the absence of all internal differentiation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Plotinus, whom al-Farabi closely follows, acknowledges that the One generates Intellect through a kind of self-overflowing, implying some internal productivity or potency.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the First possesses the internal capacity or potency to produce emanations, this constitutes a real intrinsic distinction between the First qua potential cause and qua actual being.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A distinction between the First's productive power and its self-subsistence is a form of internal composition that the causal argument alone cannot dissolve.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The First has no cause
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Anything with internal composition (e.g., matter and form, genus and differentia, or physical parts) would depend on something prior
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The First cannot depend on anything prior to itself
      ?

      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.